HARVARD UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
OF THE
GRAY HERBARIUM |
Received \% Duss, ) \4 gS
ae.
baad ot
Ws ae. ro ne!
SKK?
, os
JOURNAL
OF THE
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY
EDITED BY THE
REV. W. WILKS, M.A.
SECRETARY.
OD, 86 OCT.
1897—1898
LONDON
Printed for the Royal Horticultural Society
BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE, E.C.
Digitized by the Internet. Archive :
in 2014 ;
CONTENTS OF VOL. XXI.
J ee
PAGE
Victorn1ras Mepat or Honour IN HORTICULTURE...............cccceecencooees ye
Microscopic GaRDENING. By Prof. Marsnatu Warp, F.R.S. ............ 4
Bup TRANSFERENCE AND ITs Errects. By the Rev. Gorpon Saumon... 25
pereweorar, MAnuEES. By Mr. J.J. WHUGIS .......cccccesccnscecceccocscnene 36
WINTER AND Sprinc Beppine. By Mr. A. DEAN ............ ccc cee eee eee ees 65
Diseases oF Puants. By Mr. Gro. Masser, FLAS. ..........ccccceeeeeeees 77
Puystonocy or Prrcwer Pants. By Prof, 5. H. Vines, P.B-S........<. 92
STORING AND PRESERVING Fruit. By Mr. J. CHEAL ............ceeeeeeeeees 112
ren eTaON EN HORTICULTURE, EOQT ... 220.200.038.000 5iseesestee sve seqecnevereas 122
ERR pres Fe 2, hath shen hie sp bso nenueces heed iek he -eKav ste ses eubs 129
aN EE SSS ote id ci alc os Sv 5.5 o Sar a's ot V's b's’ « Ho Sadho dels GOB 132
RR Mls Se acres ates a ait ws Sc xe anwnw ested edceets taba naey angho- 133
ERNE oa San as fo veins evap bmon odes ¢o8'ecep es rata eak-- parse 139
a eek nc do ne wo a ae tive ds wis ae's aged deen cebeneds 141
DESSERT AND CooKING, APPLES, PEARS, AND PLUMS ............0cescceeeees 146
Murvat AccomMopaTiIon IN Puants. By Prof. Geo. Henstow, V.M.H. 153
SvuGGEsTiIons FoR Cuiswick. By Dr. M. T. Masters, F.R.S. ............ 161
ene -etremanr tay W0e WW. 1). DRURY. 25... o neces eens ewes tesneenecascans 173
feeeers AND Poway U.S.A. By Mr. 8. C. Lamp .............-ccreeesees 191
Crosstinc Fiowers. By Mr. James DoUGUAS ..............c.cececeseeeeeeeees 205
DOE ED ES) ee en ere 213
Ta OAD cel Oe rr 226
Meeeetoes. by Mr PW. Borsiner, M.A., V.M.H. .........-......0s00 256
Paeciw Cveramen. By Mr. W. IGGULDEN .............02.62 0.0 essen eneacnase 263
CampanuLa Bancurmimns. By Dr. M. T, Masters, F.R.S.............00005 271
Ry ee ae eee aE OO 53. 2s og 2 274
CONTENTS OF VOL. XXI.
PAGE
TIGMROOTME. AWD KATMBsi.0c 0508 0s sav cakes igssatncxsuevenSdiuemennm ny exits ont exe 279
Tea AND Norsetre Rosks ...... v sd.a vnien baa winu oihigens Ae Aen Wee ee igen = Jargonelle.
ms is Souvenir du Congrés.
e 5 a pear bud obtained from a friend,
which is extremely good.
Glou Morceau (old tree), budded with Doyenné du Comice. .
a budded with Beurré de l’Assomption.
‘9 - Brockworth Park.
a = Pitmaston Duchess, and _ crossed
again.
‘3 % Gratioli of Jersey.
- ” Pitmaston Duchess crossed on
Huyshe’s Prince of Wales.
Swan’s Egg (old tree), budded with Doyenné du Comice.
‘J budded with Louise Bonne of Jersey.
BUD TRANSFERENCE AND ITS EFFECTS ON FRUIT. 838
Swan’s Ege budded with Gratioli of Jersey.
9 3 Jargonelle.
a 4 Beurré Diel.
- i. Dr. Trousseau.
i 3 Souvenir du Conerés.
Zs js Pitmaston Duchess crossed on Huyshe’s
Prince of Wales.
ce 5 Thomson’s Pear crossed on Winter
Nelis.
“3 dy Brockworth Park.
Baronne de Mello, budded with Thomson’s Pear crossed on
Winter Nelis.
Brockworth Park, budded with Jargonelle.
e re Doyenné du Comice.
i. is Jargonelle crossed with Pitmaston
Duchess crossed on Doyenné
du Comice.
J osephine du Malines, budded with Thomson’s Pear crossed on
Winter Nelis.
3 Pitmaston Duchess.
Hacon’s Dicetaradsnle, grafted with Duchess d’ Angouléme, budded
with either Pitmaston
Duchess or Souvenir du
Congrés crossed Winter
Nelis.
4 8 William’s Bon Chrétien.
_ Louise Bonne of Jersey.
Marie Borde, budded with Jargonelle.
o Pe Beurré de |l’Assomption.
- - Gratioli of Jersey.
9 = Louise Bonne of Jersey.
9 iy William’s Bon Chrétien.
» 99 Souvenir du Congrés.
J - Pitmaston Duchess crossed with
Doyenné du Comice.
Winter Nelis, crossed with Souvenir du Congrés, recrossed with
Pitmaston Duchess crossed on
Doyenné du Comice.
Beurré Sterckmans, grafted with Beurré Bachelier recrossed with
Doyenné du Comice.
D
34 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Huyshe’s Prince of Wales, budded with Pear from Moorland’s
crossed on Winter
Nelis.
E: se . Pitmaston Duchess.
Dr. Trousseau, budded with Souvenir du Congrés crossed on
Winter Nelis.
Thomson’s Pear * re -
Autumn Bergamot 5 5
Pitmaston Duchess, crossed on Huyshe’s Fe of Wales recrossed
on Doyenné du Comice.
8. Results.—The practical character of the system I have
adopted ought, I think, from its present solid standpoint of
success, to be highly encouraging to others to work out the
system with still greater energy and thoughtfulness. The result,
as far as producing, through the adoption of the system, a
quantity and quality of good useful saleable fruit (I never
sell any myself, as I find it quite sufficient remuneration to
give supplies to my friends, who express their gratitude in
rapturous terms), is concerned is a certainty; the buds having
become branches, varying from 8 feet to, say, 9, and in a few
cases perhaps more than that in length, as in the case of the
Jargonelle budded on Brockworth Park, are now in wonderful
bearing order. I have had about 140 pears on the Jargonelle
bud, when at the same time I have had 700 from the parent
stock Brockworth Park.
I have had over eighty Pitmaston Duchess, crossed on
Doyenné du Comice, from four buds inserted not more than five
years ago, when I have had only some sixty from the whole of the
parent stock Doyenné du Comice. The cross is a most marvellous
one, and the season before last I had a crop on one bud, 7.e. the
branch from the bud about 5 or 6 feet long, pears hanging like
bunches of huge grapes, and with beautiful colour and _first-
class flavour; and this last season I had from two spurs, not
more than 1} in. apart, six pears of grand form, colour, and
flavour, weighing 6 lbs. } oz., the pears appearing when ripe like
huge Marie Louise. The Louise Bonne of Jersey, crossed on
Doyenné du Comice, is without exception one of the most lovely
pears I have ever seen, and to have seen the first result of the
three pears on one spur was a sight for one loving Nature’s art
never to be forgotten; the spotted trout-colour of the side in
BUD TRANSFERENCE AND ITS EFFECTS ON FRUIT. 85
shade, deepening in tint and tone as its still fairer cheek became
more and more beautiful as it became more fully exposed to the
action of the sun, when it reached a beautifully toned shade of
bronzy brick-red. I repeat I have never seen three such lovely
fruit; but, of course, you Southerners, rejoicing in greater sun-
power, must remember I live in the Vale of York, and the flavour
was most certainly quite equal to the fair form, colour, and bloom
of the fruit. An expert who saw it in its glory on the spur,
turning to me said, ‘‘ Where did you get that colour from?” and
I jokingly said, ““O, that’s a question very easily answered. I
gave them a little rouge.’’ The three pears weighed 102 oz.,
84 oz., and 8 0z.=2740z. Pitmaston Duchess, crossed on Glou
Morceau, is a very sound, good fruit, improved in form, and
partaking distinctly of the flavour of the parent stock, so I hope
the fruit will be able to prolong its season. Beurré de 1’Assomp-
tion, crossed on Glou Morceau, is a remarkably fine fruit, if
the shape only improves, but it is an ugly shape and altogether
a rough-looking diamond, nothing more could be desired as to
the delicious softness and sweetness of its flavour. Brockworth
Park, crossed on Glou Morceau, is a very good fruit, with very
good flavour, and the appearance and the colour is distinctly
pretty where the sun gets full power, but the position of the bud
is not very favourable, being low down on ‘the tree, and to the
eastward, and somewhat screened by a large pillar-rose.
Doyenné du Comice is a splendid fruit ; the best of all pears
I consider, and that is why I have mixed so much of its generous
blood with others, though I hope its season may be prolonged by
being budded on to Glou Morceau.
The Swan’s Egg crosses are legion; the poor parent seems to
sulk now that her numerous daughters bear so marvellously.
There was not one fruit on the old stock last year, though I had
wonderfully good crops on some of the buds. A large crop of
Louise Bonne of Jersey, a very fair crop of Doyenné du Comice,
considering the size of the branches, and a really beautiful
cluster of Souvenir du Congrés, quite a picture on a very small
branch, some ten fruits on a branch about two feet long.
Jargonelle gave good fruit; and a few splendid Gratioli of
Jersey.
The bloom promise for this year is most astonishing. I have
never seen anything like such a universal array of bloom spurs.
D2
36 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
The show of Pitmaston Duchess on Doyenné du Comice is
simply superb; on the four branches I calculate there are at
least 120, so that I hope when the fruit sets I may be able to
steel my greedy heart so much as to reduce the fruit from two,
three, and four on a spur, as was the case last year, to one, and
then I may hope for much larger fruit. The promise on Swan’s
Figg is no less astonishing ; in fact, I think almost every cross is
well represented as far as the gift of bloom is concerned, although
the parent has, I think, on all its wide range of 36 ft. in width
and 10 ft. in height not more than two bloom spurs, whereas on
the various crosses there are hundreds of most promising bloom
spurs. This is the case all over my garden, the walls are
covered with what will be in April a simply magnificent display
of pure beauty for an artist’s eye to feast upon. It is the same
with all my standards trained downwards; they are marvels of
beauty. One word more and I am done. My good and faithful
servant, who has been with me for many years, now in his
twenty-fifth year, loves all my surroundings as dearly as I do
myself, takes as great a pride in all, and carries out everything
that I wish, and guards all as only love and faithful service can
and will do.
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND THEIR BEARING UPON
HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE.
By Mr. J. J. Wix.is.
[Read April 13, 1897.]
In studying the history and progress of horticulture, we find
that one of the very first requirements for a healthful condition
and a subsequent successful progagation of any plant consists
in adapting a well-devised system of soil preparation and of
manuring.
[ emphasise these points, not only on account of their
intrinsic importance, but for the further reason that their
management is in a controlling degree within the individual
direction of every practical horticulturist.
I, ,
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 37
There is but little doubt that an indifferent system of soil
preparation and of the feeding of plants, is at the root ofa great
many well-founded complaints of failure in various branches of
_ gardening, and in fruit cultivation in particular.
I have in my mind at the present moment an estate on
which it was said good fruit could not be grown, and such
luxuries as peaches, nectarines, and apricots, or, in fact, any
stone fruit, was an utter impossibility; yet by the introduction
of a gardener who was to some extent acquainted with the
elementary principles connected with horticultural chemistry,
and who understood the value and method of using artificial
manures, this soil now produces some of the finest fruit in the
kingdom, and that in abundance.
Our views as to the use of manures generally have undergone
a considerable transformation during the past few years.
Scientific investigation has succeeded in solving a number of
most important questions, and we have in consequence been led
to adopt new and clearer principles relative to the application of
manure to our various cultivated plants. Yet, while the farmer
has been told by the agricultural chemist how much phosphoric
acid, how much potash, and how much nitrogen any of his crops
require, also in what form they should be applied, and the way
to use the manure to the best effect, so as to get the highest
possible return; in most books on horticulture, and with the
majority of practical gardeners, an astonishing ignorance is
displayed on all these topics, and in actual work the condition of
things is no different. Gardens, orchards, conservatories, and
vegetable areas, are manured usually without any consideration
at all. They are dressed with large quantities of stable-manure,
farmyard manure, or vegetable compost, which frequently con-
tains but little real plant-food sustaining constituents, no thought
is given to the waste of certain ingredients, which must neces-
sarily ensue from an excessive manuring with such materials,
and how much more useful these manures could be rendered by
an admixture with suitable artificial fertilisers.
It may surprise many gardeners to learn that 20 tons of
good farmyard manure will not produce so large a crop of
cucumbers as 150 lb. of nitrate of soda, provided available
minerals are not deficient in the soil. The 20 tons of dung
88 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
will contain more than 200 lb. of nitrogen, while the 150 lb. of
nitrate of soda will contain only about 233 lb. of nitrogen. And
yet, that the great effect produced by the nitrate of soda is due
to its nitrogen content there is abundant evidence.
Why, then, does not the 200 lb. of nitrogen in the farmyard
manure do as much service as the 233 1b. of nitrogen in the
nitrate of soda? Simply because the nitrogen in the dung is in
the form of an organic compound, and has to be converted into
nitrate of lime before the cucumbers or other plants to which it
may be applied, can use it; while the nitrogen inthe nitrate of
soda is exceedingly soluble, and is available as plant-food at
once.
Plants are set in pots of soil, yet few persons realise how
they starve in such a small quantity of material, how they sicken
and fall victims to fungi; how they suffer from decaying roots,
simply because they lack nourishment of a suitable kind. Dr.
Wagner, who may be quoted as an authority on this matter,
says, “‘ It is impossible to state how much more easily and con-
veniently, and how much more successfully, and with what
greater financial advantage vegetable gardening, fruit culture,
flower raising and growing, could be conducted if a rational
system of plant-manuring were introduced.” I myself am per-
suaded that a great future is in store for the horticulturist if he
will but study the composition of artificial manures, and their
adaptation to the needs of plants, so as to raise crops and place
them on the market owt of season.
A system of manuring may be called well devised or rational
when it is based upon the results of a careful examination into
the chemical composition of the plants under cultivation, and on
a due consideration as to their natural capabilities for availing
themselves of the needed food, both from the atmosphere and
from the supplies within the soil.
The object sought in cultivating plants is usually to produce
a growth in some of their parts that is unnatural to the species
in its native habitat. This part may be the flower, the seed,
the fruit, the stem, or the leaves. Or, again, the object may be
to obtain an extra large amount of sugar as in grape production,
or of starch as in the growth of potatoes, or it may be to pro-
duce leaves with more cellular substance and less fibrous matter
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 89
as in lettuce, spinach, or asparagus, &c.; all this means in the
end nothing less than that the chance of the horticulturist for
controlling the quality as well as the quantity of his crops is
daily improving.
We are told by Dr. C. A. Goessmann, “ That to feed plants
intelligently implies possession in a fair degree of two kinds of
information, namely a knowledge of the special wants of the
plant under cultivation as regards the absolute amount and rela-
tive proportions of the various essential elements of plant-food ;
and also a familiarity with the composition and the general
physical properties of the different kinds of manurial matter at
our disposal.”
All our cultivated plants, whether in the garden, the orchard,
or in the conservatory, contain the same elementary constituents,
yet no two of them are in the same absolute amount and rela-
tive proportions. Each plant has its especial wants at different
stages of its development. Succulent and rapidly-growing
vegetables require an abundant supply of nitrogen in an avail-
able form during their early periods of growth; flowers and
fruit-trees require phosphatic food when blooming and develop-
ing seeds or fruit; grape-vines need a large amount of available
potash during the formation and maturing of the grapes for the
production of a rich and sugary juice; while potatoes require
nitrogen and potash for the production of starch in the tubers.
The subject of my lecture being more directly in connection
with the feeding of plants than with their chemical composition,
I shall not trouble you with many analytical results. Neverthe-
less, in order to illustrate how plants of the garden may, and do,
vary in their chemical constitution, I will direct your attention
to a few statistics bearing upon the question.
Table I. gives the amount of selected constituents taken from
the soil by the growth of one ton of various descriptions of vege-
tables. Column 1 shows the number of pounds of dry substance
yielded; the second and third columns give the quantity of
nitrogen and of ash in the fresh vegetables ; while the fourth and
fifth columns give the number of pounds of potash and phos-
phoric acid yielded by the ash of the plants analysed.
40 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
TABLE I.—SELECTED CONSTITUENTS in 1 TON of VARIOUS DESCRIPTIONS
of VEGETABLES in a FRESH CONDITION. Quantities in pounds.
Dry sub- | Nitrogen Ash Potash Ber
stance id
lbs lbs lbs. lbs lbs
Green Cabbage :—
Head A : - 224 6 21 10 4
Stem . : : ! 246 5 35 13 3
Potatos :—
Tubers : 2 : 515 8 21 13 4
Haulms_ . * «| aebag ll +4 22 8
Carrots :—
Roots. : _ - 336 5 18 a 3
Leaves : : ; 399 11 54 6 2
Peas :—
Seed and Pods . ~ | toe sO.) ee 23 19
Vines. ; ;, . | £eae 23 97 22 8
Onion Bulbs. : : 314 6 ‘igs 5 3
Celery ‘ : : 356 5 39 17 5
Asparagus . : ; ; 150 bles, folk > 3 2
Lettuce . : 2 : 134 5 18 8 2
Thus we see that in one ton, or 2,240 lbs. of green cabbage
heads, there is only 224 lbs. of dry substance, 6 lbs. of nitrogen,
and 21 Ibs. of ash, the remaining 1,989 lbs. being water. The
ash yields 10 lbs. of potash, and 4 lbs. of phosphoric acid. The
stem of the cabbage is seen to contain in one ton weight 246 Ibs.
of dry substance, 5 lbs. of nitrogen, and 35 lbs.of ash. The ash
contains 13 lbs. of potash, and 38 lbs. of phosphoric acid.
Potatos carry off in each ton of tubers 515 lbs. of dry substance,
8 lbs. of nitrogen, 21 lbs. of ash, 18 lbs. of potash, and 4 lbs. of
phosphoric acid; while one ton of potato haulms contains
1,919 lbs. of dry substance, 11 lbs. of nitrogen, 44 lbs. of ash,
22 lbs. of potash, and 8 lbs. of phosphoric acid. Peas are seen
to carry off from the soil large quantities of each of the ingre-
dients, while asparagus and lettuce are made up very consider-
ably of water, and therefore contain in each one ton but a small
proportion of nitrogen or of ash constituents.
The data show, however, that the refuse portion of vege-
tables, the stems and haulms, abstract from the soil a very much
larger amount of plant-food constituents, weight for weight, than
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 4]
do the marketable portions; teaching us the advisability of
returning to the soil all the unsaleable products.
There are quite a number of ingredients that enter into
the composition of plant-ash—namely, potash, soda, magnesia,
lime, phosphoric acid, sulphuric acid, oxide of iron, chlorine, &c.
All, or nearly all, of these are proved to be necessary to the full
development of horticultural plants; but I have selected those
which we find in actual practice necessary to return to the soil,
and are willing to pay for in artificial manures. The other
elements take care of themselves in nearly all fertile soils.
Potash, phosphoric acid, and nitrogen are the three constituents
generally taken into consideration, and the poorer the soil in
what may be called its natural fertility, the more complete must
be the restoration of these important ingredients that are carried
away in the crops, if productiveness is to be maintained or
increased.
In order that plants may obtain all the fertilising substances
they require, it is necessary that there be a large excess of them
in the soil, probably double the amount shown by an analysis of
the crops grown. If a gardener proportions his supply of
manure to the waste caused by the growth and removal of his
crops, he will keep up the fertility of his soil to the degree in
which he found it; and if he gives more judiciously he will
gradually increase its fertility, and enable it to withstand
drought and other adverse influences more effectually.
The small amount of dry substance in the various vegetables
enumerated in Table I. shows how largely these products are
composed of water, and points to the fact that if the gardener is
to ensure vigorous and uninterrupted growth in his vegetables
he must have a sufficiency of moisture in the soil in immediate
proximity to the mass of root-fibrils which branch out from the
root-stock. In ordinary garden practice, farmyard or stable
manure is not only largely relied upon, but it is often applied in
exceedingly large quantities. It is probable that independently
of the liberal supply of all necessary plant-food constituents in
farmyard manure, its beneficial effects are in a considerable
degree due to its influence on the mechanical condition of the
soil, rendering it more porous, hence more moisture-sustaining,
and, therefore, more easily permeable to the surface roots, upon
the development of which the success of garden vegetables so
42 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
much depends. Then, again, something may be due to an in-
creased temperature of the surface soil, engendered by the
decomposition of so large an amount of organic matter within
it; whilst the carbonic acid evolved in the decomposition will,
with the aid of moisture, serve to render the mineral resources
of the soil more soluble.
Good farmyard manure is very rich in available potash and
phosphoric acid, which is doubtless one reason of its immense
value and general application to all garden vegetables, contain-
ing as they do so large a proportion of these elements, frequently
50 per cent. of potash, and from 10 to 20 per cent. of phosphoric
acid, in the total ash; artificial manures, therefore, are not
recommended to take the place of farmyard or stable manure,
but to be used in conjunction with them.
Table II. shows the percentage amounts of potash, lime,
magnesia, and phosphoric acid in the ashes of four varieties of
fruit trees and of raspberry canes.
These constituents are given in the ashes of the wood and in
the ashes of the fruit separately. I might have quoted many
other examples, but have selected these as showing how very
variable is the composition of our fruit trees, and how greatly
the composition of the ash of the wood differs from the ash of
the fruit; and, further, for the purpose of showing that the
manures to be applied to the soil for the nourishment of these
trees, and to enable them to yield their fruit satisfactorily, must
vary accordingly.
TABLE II,—SELECTED CONSTITUENTS in the ASHES of the Woop, and in
the AsHES of the Frurr of VARIous TREES. Quantities per cent. :—
Apple | Pear | Cherry
Chestnut | Raspberry
Constituents in the Wood.
Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent.
Potash . : ; ; 19:2 4°2 20°8 101 14:2
Lime . ' ‘ 63°6 17-2 28°7 43°6 38°2
Magnesia P ; : 75 51 9°2 3°2 10°'8
Phosphoric acid. ; 4°9 3'8 ee | 15 23°6
Constituents in the Fruit.
Potash . ; : ; 46°2 547 51°9 39°4 50:0
Lime . ‘ ; : 4°9 80 7°5 78 19°4
Magnesia. . ; 65 5:2 55 78 9°6
Phosphoric acid . .| 10°9 15°2 160 83 20°5
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 43
You will observe from this data that the demand made upon
the soil by the growth of fruit tree wood is chiefly of the in-
eredient lime, and is very considerable, amounting in the pear
tree to over 77 per cent. of the total minerals ; while the ash of
the cherry tree contains but 28°7 per cent. of lime; but on the
other hand, the cherry tree is the largest consumer of potash.
Again, while the wood of the chestnut requires but 14 per cent.
of phosphoric acid, raspberry canes take up from the soil 23°6
per cent. of this element.
Let us now look at the fruit requirements as compared with
that of the wood. One hundred pounds of ash of the various
fruit contain from 39 lbs. to nearly 55 lbs. of potash ; the element
phosphoric acid comes second in order, ranging from 8 per cent.
in the chestnut to 205 per cent. in the raspberry. Cherries draw
upon the soil, weight for weight, about like pears, being larger
consumers of potash, phosphoric acid, and lime than are apples.
The two constituents, lime and magnesia, are very similar in
quantity in the various fruits, but they are exceedingly wide
apart in the ashes of the wood. Hence, in the growth of wood
and for the formation of stones or pips in the fruit, lime and
potash are the predominating ingredients required ; while in the
production of the fleshy part of the fruit, and in fact whatever
tends to maturation, it is potash and phosphoric acid upon which
the greatest demands are made.
Table III. illustrates very strikingly the composition of the
grape vine in its several sections, of stem, leaves, and fruit. The
selected constituents of dry substance, ash, nitrogen, potash,
phosphoric acid, and sugar are given in one ton of each, of fresh
fruit, leaves, and stems.
The figures show that in one ton, or 2,240 lbs. of grapes, there
are 363 lbs. of dry substance, 20 lbs. of mineral matter (ash)
34 lbs. of nitrogen, 10 lbs. of potash, 3 lbs. of phosphoric acid‘
and 205 lbs. of sugar. In one ton of grape-vine leaves there are
found 829 lbs. of dry substance, 98 lbs. of ash, 11 lbs. of nitrogen,
6 lbs. of potash, 1 lb. of phosphoric acid, and 40 lbs. of sugar.
While one ton of the woody stems contains 981 lbs. of dry sub-
stance, 40 lbs. of ash, 43 Ibs. of nitrogen, 4 lbs. of potash, 14 lb.
of phosphoric acid, and 9 lbs. of sugar.
44 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
TABLE IIL—THE GRAPE VINE. SELECTED CONSTITUENTS in 1 TON
each of FresH Fruit, LEAVES, and STEMS. Quantities in pounds.
In the Grapes | In the Leaves | In the Stems
lbs lbs. Ibs
Dry substance . : ; ae] 363 829 981
Mineral matter (Ash) ; : iid 20 93 40
Nitrogen . : ; : 33 11 43
Potash : : ; : 10 6 4
Phosphoric acid ‘ : : : 3 1 13
Sugar : ; 7 ; ; : 205 40 9
The fruit of the grape vine is thus seen to be essentially a
sugar producer ; further, the data show that a certain propor-
tion of this non-nitrogenous element is found in the stems and
leaves also.
In practical work it is found that, provided the mineral con-
stituents, and especially potash, are not deficient in the soil, the
produce of grapes, and of sugar in the grapes, is greatly increased
by the amount of nitrogen available to the vine within the soil,
whether derived from previous accumulations, as from old turfy
loam, or from direct nitrogenous manuring. I was told by a
grape grower of extensive experience in Jersey that he found
nothing so beneficial for grape culture as sulphate of ammonia,
both for colour of skin and for sweetness of fruit.
The most prominent effect of the use of nitrogenous manures,
combined with potash and phosphoric acid, is the increased pro-
duction of sugar in the fruit and of dry substance and cellulose
in the stems and leaves.
TABLE IV.—COMPOSITION of the STRAWBERRY. PLANTS and FRUIT.
Pounds per acre.
In Plants In Fruit | Total
Lae i aie ory |
ibe: Ibs. | lbs.
Dry substance . : : ’ . 4,268 1,054 5,322
Nitrogen . ; ‘ : 89 ic a 105
Mineral matter (Ash) / . i 414 49 | 463
% i
Total 4,771 1,119 | 5,890
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 45
Taste LV.—continued.
In Plants In Fruit Total
Constituents in the Ash: Per cent. | Percent. | Per cent.
Potash . : : : : : 89:1 | d 108°8
Soda ‘ . Z : : ‘ 6°4 0:9 es,
Lime. F : c . ties MOA io 110°6
Magnesia : : : . ; 1671 O'7 16°8
Phosphoric acid. : : : 35°3 54 40°7
Silica and iron oxide. ; ' 43°3 5:3 48°6
Other elements. : . : 120°9 8°8 129°7
Total ‘ : 413°8 48:7 462°5
Table IY. illustrates the composition of the strawberry plant
and also of the strawberry fruit. The data show the amounts,
which are given in pounds, of the various constituents that would
be carried off from an acre of land by the growth of an average
crop of strawberries. The last column of the table shows that
more than two tons of organic matter, 105 lbs. of nitrogen, and
nearly 500 lbs. of mineral ingredients are required per acre to
sustain and build up the fabric of the strawberry plant and its
proper proportion of fruit. Fortunately, by far the greater part
of the dry substance of the strawberry plants is furnished from
natural sources that are practically inexhaustible. Water, in
the condition of rain and dew, and the carbonic acid gas, which
abounds in never-failing quantity in the air, build the great
bulk of the tissues of plants; therefore, for these constituents,
except in times of drought or in culture under glass, we need
have no anxiety. But moisture and carbon are useless without
other constituents, which have to be derived from the soil.
These are nitrogen and the mineral substances. Of all the
elements found as entering into the composition of the strawberry
as of other plants, we lay the greatest stress upon nitrogen,
potash, and phosphoric acid, because, in addition to being
necessary for the growth of even the smallest crops, they are not
in sufficient quantity or in such an available condition that
remunerative crops of strawberries can be obtained without a
fairly continuous supply. We see from the figures given in
Table IV. that the essential constituents of the strawberry plant
and also of its fruit are nitrogen and potash.
Phosphoric acid stands third in order of requirement, the
46 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
ratio of potash to phosphoric acid being about 3 to 1. Lime is
also an important element, but most fertile soils contain this
substance in sufficient quantity for strawberry culture without
any artificial application.
The strawberry is usually considered an exhausting crop, yet
so far as the real loss of plant-food through gathering of the
fruit is concerned, the facts, looking at them superficially, scarcely
bear out this opinion.
To replace or restore to the soil the substances removed by
the strawberry fruit would not in itself appear to require a very
heavy application of manure. It is found, however, as a matter
of practical experience that, to make strawberry culture success-
ful, the soil must be fed very liberally. High manuring for
strawberries is an essential condition for successful growth,
because not only has the fruit to be provided for, but there is a
great drain upon the plants in the production of runners. Then,
again, the growing season is short, and more especially the
fruiting period. During a comparatively brief time there is a
large demand for immediately available forms of plant-food, a
demand that must be met if the best results are to be obtained.
And this need can well be supplied by artificial manures.
The essential elements of plant-food are not required by
different crops or plants in the same invariable proportions at
the various successive stages of growth, but are wanted at
different periods of their life in different absolute amounts, and
in different relative proportions; hence, it is of the utmost
importance that artificial manures should be given in suitable
and fixed proportions, and not at the mere fancy of the grower.
Further, the particular form in which we apply the various
articles of plant-food, as well as the special associations in which
they may be applied, exert quite frequently a decided influence,
not only on the quantity of the crop grown, but also on its
quality.
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND THEIR COMPOSITION.
I shall now direct your attention to the nature and compo-
sition of some of the principal varieties of artificial manures
in the market, and afterwards make a few practical remarks
on their selection and application to different horticultural
productions.
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 47
Table V. gives the quantity of nitrogen, phosphoric acid,
potash, and lime in average farmyard manure, in guano of
“ 900d” and of “ bad” quality, and in twelve different descrip-
tions of artificial manures, embracing those of a nitrogenous and
of a non-nitrogenous character. The quantities of the various
ingredients are given in pounds, in 1 ton weight of each kind of
manure.
TABLE V,.—Showing SELECTED CONSTITUENTS in 1 ToN of FARMYARD
MANURE, and in 1 Ton of VARIOUS DESCRIPTIONS of ARTIFICIAL
MANURES. Quantities in pounds.
Description of Manure Nitrogen es) te i Potash Lime
lbs. Ibs. lbs. lbs.
Farmyard manure . , : : i | 8 12 16
Guano—Good, No. 1 : : ‘ SLi f 213 182 198
Pe eee ts ; : : 156 314 74 282
na Adulterated, No.1 . ; 4 201 2 1,535
> - No. 2-. 3 13 44 0 515
Bone manure . i : : : 80 515 — | 1,200
Superphosphate of lime . . : — 550 — 716
4 (double) . : : -— 963 — 300
Basic slag : : ‘ ‘ : — 336 — | 1,120
Kainit salt , : : : : -— — 515 —
Potash—Sulphate . : ; ; — — 1,120 —
e Muriate . : : : — — 1,792 —
a Phosphate. : . — 851 558 =
Ammonia—Sulphate ; ; .| 448 — -- -
2 Phosphate. - .| 156 1,120 — —
Nitrate of soda : ‘ : . | 336 — — —
a potash . : : : 291 — 1,008 —
It is seen that 1 ton of average quality farmyard manure
contains 11 lbs. of nitrogen, 8 lbs. of phosphoric acid, 12 lbs. of
potash, and 16 lbs. of lime.
It has been found from numerous investigations that horti-
culturists use nearly 7 lbs. of nitrogen in the form of manure to
get back 1 lb. of nitrogen in the crop produced. Therefore, so
long as they use nitrogen in the form of farmyard or stable
manure, it is absolutely necessary to use immense quantities of
this material, owing to its low percentage of plant-food.
Gardeners find it more or less profitable to use this bulky
substance, but thanks to the investigations of scientific men, we
now know how to obtain the same result with far greater
certainty and at vastly less cost.
48 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Guano.
The next manure on the list is guano; many horticulturists
believe in guano who will use no other artificial manure; and
the attraction of the name has kept this article, until recently,
at a high price compared with other fertilisers of the same
efficiency. Multitudes of inferior manures—many of them
almost worthless—have been sold under the magic name of
guano, of which I quote two instances that have recently come
to hand.
Peruvian guano when pure is certainly one of the most
important of the nitrogenous manures. Average samples contain
from 5 to 8 per cent. of nitrogen, and from 20 to 35 per cent. of
phosphate of lime. It is estimated that 1} ton of nitrogenous
guano is equal to about 83 tons of average farmyard manure,
the nitrogen of the guano being much more active than that
contained in the dung.
In Table V. the “good”? guano No. 1 contains in each
one ton 857 lbs. of nitrogen, 213 lbs. of phosphoric acid, 182 lbs.
of potash, and 198 lbs. of lime. As the greater part of the
nitrogen in guano readily becomes soluble, it follows that if the
deposit has been exposed for a long time to the weather, much
of this constituent will have been washed away, and the residue
will be chiefly insoluble, and consist to a considerable extent of
phosphate of lime. Thus sample No. 2 gives an example of this
kind, and is seen to contain in each ton, only 156 lbs. of nitrogen,
less by 201 lbs. than sample 1; but 314 Ibs. of phosphoric acid,
being an increase in that constituent of 101 lbs. over sample No. 1.
The potash shows a decrease of 108 lbs. in each ton, while the
lime, the least valuable ingredient, shows an increase of 84 lbs. in
each ton.
Now this very striking difference in the composition of guano
not only applies to samples obtained from different sources, but
even to those from different parts of the same cargo; therefore
prudent buyers may naturally look to sellers for some guarantee
as to the quality of their purchases, and should never purchase
without it.
Specimens of glaring adulteration are shown by the two
samples quoted. Thus No. 1, which had been adulterated with
gypsum (sulphate of lime), contained in each one ton only 4 lbs.
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 49
of nitrogen, 201 lbs. of phosphoric acid, and 2 lbs. of potash,
with 1,535 lbs. or 683 per cent. of lime. Sample No. 2 had been
adulterated with sand, and contained in each ton 18 lbs. of
nitrogen, 44 lbs. of phosphoric acid, no potash, and 515 lbs. of
lime. About three-quarters of this sample, or 75 per cent.,
consisted of sand.
Good Peruvian guano has some advantage over most other
unmixed manures containing the same percentages of nitrogen
and phosphates, on account of its more complex chemical con-
dition, the manurial constituents being in several different forms,
of different degrees of solubility, so that they supply the plant
requirements more slowly and evenly through the period of
srowth than can be done by manures in which the contents are
each in some one form of chemical combination.
It has already been mentioned that guanos are found, varying
in composition from the most highly nitrogenous, to those con-
taining very small percentages of nitrogen, and that, generally
speaking, those poor in nitrogen are rich in phosphoric acid.
Hence we find that phosphatic guanos are usually obtained from
old deposits which are located in rainy districts, and very largely
from various islands in the Pacific. The materials left after a
long exposure to the weather are chiefly mineral matters, con-
taining phosphoric acid and magnesia, together with various
impurities.
These guanos are frequently used for the manufacture of
compound manures, and if properly made are rapidly acting
fertilisers.
Phosphatic Manures.
The next four items in Table V. deal with phosphatic
manures. Phosphate of lime is a substance which has acquired
considerable importance in recent years, and is a fertiliser of
great consequence. There are several varieties of this substance,
as the term ‘“ phosphate of lime” includes such well-known
manures as boned meal, bone ash, bone black, superphosphate of
lime, phosphatic rock, basic slag, &e.
Bones may properly be included under the head of artificial
manures, because they are allied to phosphatic guanos, and
receive similar treatment in rendering their phosphate contents
soluble, as in the preparation of superphosphate.
E
50 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Bones are true phosphatic manures, although they contain a
small percentage of nitrogen. The sample quoted in the diagram
contains in each one ton, 80 lbs. of nitrogen, 515 lbs. of phos-
phorie acid, and 1,200 lbs. of lime.
Bone meal and steamed bone flour are usually in a very fine
state of division, and the phosphoric acid, in the steamed material,
is in a more soluble condition than in raw bone meal, conse-
quently it readily decomposes in the soil, and is specially suitable
when early vegetable growth is required.
Bones finely ground are much more effective than }-inch
or }-inch bones, because the material can be more thoroughly
distributed in the soil, and consequently comes into action with
greater rapidity.
Care is required in buying bone manures, as they are some-
times adulterated either with chalk or gypsum.
Mineral superphosphate is the cheapest source of soluble
phosphate; the ordinary quality is guaranteed to contain from
25 to 28 per cent. of phosphate made soluble. Superphosphate,
however, is frequently made containing as much as 35 or even
40 per cent. of soluble phosphate. While by a special process
what is called ‘‘double’’ or very concentrated superphosphates
are manufactured containing 70 per cent. or more of phosphate
made soluble. Double superphosphate is as good as free from
sulphuric acid, and may contain three times as much phosphoric
acid as ordinary superphosphate, so that the cost of transporta-
tion per ton of phosphoric acid is reduced to a third or even to
one-half, whilst the unit of phosphoric acid does not cost more in
double superphosphate than in the less valuable superphosphate.
Concentrated phosphatic manures are especially valuable for
the purpose of ensuring a very rapid and vigorous early growth
of plants.
We learn from investigations by Professor Wagner with
vines, fruit troes, and berry-bearing shrubs, that a great deal
depends upon these plants producing leaves rapidly and abun-
dantly in the early spring, also upon the blossoms appearing at
the right time, and upon the fructification ensuing vigorously ;
inasmuch as the more completely all these phenomena take
place the more certain are the prospects of a fruit production
satisfactory both for quantity and quality. In the case of
kitchen vegetables and all seedlings, it is also of great advantage
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 51
to make these develop rapidly and vigorously in order that they
may recover as soon as possible from the ravages made upon
them by insects, frosts, and bad weather; further, that they
may elaborate as quickly as possible a widely distributed and
deeply penetrating network of healthy roots, and in this way
acquire so much vital energy and so much power of resistance
that they can encounter with successful opposition all injurious
attacks, from whatever source.
In order to attain all this, the laine condition must be
fulfilled—that the plant during its early stages of development
has placed at its disposal as much easily available and readily
soluble phosphoric acid as it can possibly assimilate.
Basic Slag is a somewhat new phosphatic manure, containing
from 14 to 20 per cent. of phosphoric acid, or equal from 30 to
42 per cent. of tricalcium phosphate. One ton weight will con-
tain about 336 lbs. of phosphoric acid and 1,120 lbs. of lime; the
latter will be of a caustic character, and will act on the nitrogen
of the soil probably more quickly than the lime in superphosphate.
The phosphoric acid in basic slag acts slower and over a longer
period than the same element in superphosphate. It isa suitable
material for providing the soil with a lasting supply of phosphoric
acid, especially in the lower layers of soil, such as vine-borders ;
this manure will also ensure the healthy development of fruit
trees, vines, ornamental trees, and shrubs. It also provides a
good dressing for lawns, cricket grounds, and paddocks, as it
encourages the growth of clovers and the finer quality of
grasses.
Basic slag may be used in preference to superphosphate on
all wet, peaty, and rich garden soils, on account of it contain-
ing free caustic ime which neutralises the organic acids of the
soil. But it must not be used in combination with ammonia
salts, because it sets the ammonia free and causes a loss of plant-
food.
Potash Manures.—F our kinds of potash manures are enumer-
ated in Table V.—kainit, sulphate of potash, muriate of potash,
and phosphate of potash. Kainit is a crude potash salt, and the
commonest form in which potash is now employed as manure.
One ton will contain about 515 lbs. of potash, with about 25 per
cent. of magnesia salts, and 35 per cent. of common salt
(chloride of sodium).
B 2
52 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Kainit is particularly suited for the growth of potatos, as it
both increases the weight of the produce and improves the
quality of the tubers. It may also be used for vines and fruit
trees, as indeed for most garden products, and also for lawns and
paddocks. It may be mixed with superphosphate, nitrate of
soda, or sulphate of ammonia.
Sulphate of Potash supplies in each ton weight about 1,120 lbs.
of potash, therefore more than double that of the kainit; it is
especially helpful to all leguminous crops, such as peas, beans,
scarlet runners, and similar plants. Vines, fruit trees, and
roses will develop sturdily and bloom efficiently with an
available supply of potash, combined with some phosphatic
manure.
Muriate of Potash is now largely used as a manure; it may
contain 80 per cent. of potash, or 1,792 lbs. per ton; therefore,
per unit is frequently cheaper than sulphate of potash. It is a
useful manure for fruit trees, but in some soils when applied to
potatos it tends to make them waxy rather than mealy.
Phosphate of Potash is a manure which embraces phosphoric
acid and potash in one, yielding per ton 851 lbs. of phosphoric acid
with 558 lbs. of potash. This will be founda substance ready for
immediate assimilation, offering plants phosphoric acid and
potash in an acceptable form, especially adapted to horticultural
purposes. |
The four last items on Table V. refer to nitrogenous manures.
Sulphate of Ammonia is a manure supplying nitrogen at the
rate of 448 lbs. per ton. It is one of the most concentrated forms
in which ammonia can be used, and is at the same time one of
the most active and readily available forms.
From an economical point of view this manure cannot be
recommended for chalky and limestone lands, as lime assists to
expel the ammonia in the state of gas.
It has been found that sulphate of ammonia is a better
manure than nitrate of soda, for applications with phosphates on
clayey and strong soils. It is slower in its action than nitrate of
soda, since its ammonia has to be converted into nitrates in the
soil before it is available as food to the majority of plants.
The efficiency of a given amount of nitrogen in manure is
greatly dependent on the completeness of the accompanying
mineral supply, and especially on that of potash and phosphates.
— hl
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 53
Sulphate of ammonia mixes well with bone meal, wood ashes,
and superphosphates.
Some extensive growers of grapes have reported that they get
better coloured and better quality of fruit with sulphate of ammonia
than with nitrate of soda, provided there is no lack of potash
and phosphoric acid in the soil. It has also been found that the
greater the excess of the nitrogenous supply, the greater the
luxuriance of the wood and foliage and the less ripe and sugary
will be the grapes. We may, therefore, say that sulphate of
ammonia by itself tends to produce leaves rather than flowers or
fruit, especially when the ground has been partially exhausted
of its mineral matter by previous crops.
Phosphate of Ammonia supplies in each ton weight, 156 lbs.
of nitrogen, and 1,120 lbs. of phosphoric acid. It is a very con-
centrated and expensive manure, yet adapted for flower raising,
and for all valuable and delicate cultures in the open garden and
in the conservatory, such as roses, chrysanthemums, fuchsias,
camellias, flowering shrubs and foliage plants.
Nitrate of Soda is an exceedingly active nitrogenous manure
supplying plant-food of the most concentrated and direct kind,
and its action is both feeding and stimulating. The value of
nitrate of soda depends on its amount of nitrogen, and Table V.
shows that each ton contains 336 lbs. of that constituent. It
supplies no potash, nor phosphoric acid; consequently for
nitrate of soda to produce its proper effects, either the soil must
be in good condition maintained by a plentiful use of dung, or a
full artificial mineral supply must be supplemented.
As a rule, it has been found that the horticultural crops
which require the most labour per acre, are the crops which
yield the highest profits from the use of nitrate of soda, that is to
say, the early crops of vegetables, or those produced “out of
season.’ Thus 100 pounds of nitrate of soda will furnish more
nitrogen to plants early in the spring than can be got from 8 or
10 tons of farmyard manure.
Farmyard manure will furnish nitric acid for late crops, but
for early crops the market gardeners who fail to use nitrate of
soda or similar concentrated fertilisers are not alive to their own
interests. Nitrate of soda or sulphate of ammonia should be
used in the garden, not asa substitute for farmyard manure, but
as a highly prized and invaluable addition.
54 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Nitrate of soda can be mixed with phosphatic and potash
fertilisers as required.
Nitrate of Potash, the next item on the list, contributes both
nitrogen and potash. One ton weight yields 291 lbs. of nitrogen,
and 1,008 tons of potash. This will be found a useful manure
for supplying plants in a combined form with the necessary
quantity of readily assimilable potash, and of easily available
_ nitrogen.
[EXPERIMENTS WITH ARTIFICIAL MANURES.
I now direct your attention to some results obtained by
experiment, after the application of various artificial manures, and
of farmyard manure, to crops of potatos, tomatos, strawberries,
and peach trees.
Table VI. illustrates the effect of various manures on the
srowth of potatos at Rothamsted, Hertfordshire. The results
are a summary of produce obtained per acre over a period of
twelve years, 1876-1887, without manure, with farmyard manure,
and with various artificial manures, applied singly, and also in
combination.
TABLE VI.—EXPERIMENTS on POTATOS at ROTHAMSTED. SUMMARY of
PRODUCE of TUBERS PER ACRE. Twelve years, 1876-1887. Quanti-
ties given in cwts.
Manures per acre Total tubers Sen oF
cwts. cwts.
No manure. ; . , ‘ > : a! 393 —
Superphosphate of lime, 3} cwts. . ‘ : a | 738 348
Mixed mineral manure : ; ; ‘ 754 354
Ammonium salts alone, 400 lbs... , ; : 453 6
Nitrate of soda alone, 550 lbs. é : : : 522 123
Ammonium salts and minerals : : : ; 1342 943
Nitrate of soda and minerals , , q : 5 1338 93+
Farmyard manure, 14 tons . ; ; , : 823 43
In the first place the data shows that the average produce of
potatos without manure is not quite two tons per acre. By
superphosphate alone the produce is raised to nearly 83 tons, a
gain of 84% cwts. per acre over the unmanured. By a mixed
inineral manure, containing besides superphosphate of lime,
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE, 55
salts of potash, soda and magnesia, to just over 33 tons, that is
to a little more than by the superphosphate alone, showing that
up to this amount of produce the character of the soil exhaustion
was much more that of available phosphoric acid than of potash.
The beneficial effects of mineral manures, and especially of phos-
phates, are usually observed with ripened as well as with succu-
lent crops that are spring sown in the garden, and which have,
with a short period of growth, comparatively superficial rooting,
and which rely, therefore, much on the stores of plant-food in
the surface soil.
It is remarkable that there is much less increase of potato
tubers by nitrogenous manures alone than by mineral manures
alone.
Thus by ammonium salts alone there is an average produce
of only 6 cwis. more than without manure; and with nitrate
of soda alone there is an average increase of about double this
amount, namely 12? cwts. per acre. The better result by nitrate
of soda than by ammonium salts is doubtless due to the nitro-
genous supply being more immediately available and more
rapidly distributed within the soil, and so inducing a more
extended development of feeding-roots. The next plot with the
mixed mineral manure and ammonium salts together shows that
there was an average of 1344 cwis. per acre, a gain of 943 cwts.
over the plot without manure; and with the mineral manure
and the same amount of nitrogen as nitrate of soda, an average
of 138 cwts. of tubers per acre was produced, that is nearly twice
as much as with the mineral manure alone, and about 23 times
more than with the nitrogenous manure alone. Finally, the
bottom line gives the results obtained by farmyard manure,
which, besides supplying to the soil an abundance of mineral
matters, and a large amount of organic substance rich in carbon,
yielding about 200 lbs. of nitrogen, yet gave considerably less
produce of potatos than an artificial mixture of mineral manure
and ammonium salts or nitrate of soda, supplying only 86 lbs.
of nitrogen per acre per annum.
The fact is, that it is only the comparatively small proportion
of the nitrogen in farmyard or stable manure which is due to the
liquid dejections of the animals, that is in a readily and rapidly
available condition; whilst that due to more or less digested
matter passing in the feces is more slowly available, and that
56 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
in the litter remains a very long time inactive. Hence the addi-
tion of nitrogen as nitrate of soda, ammonia salts, or guano to
farmyard manure has a very marked effect on garden produce
generally, and especially that required for early production.
Table VII. gives the results of experiments on the growth of
potatos at Connecticut, United States, “On light soil” and
“ On heavy soil.” The illustration is a summary of the total
tubers obtained over four years, 1878-1881. The quantities are
given in bushels per acre, without manure and with various
artificial manures.
TABLE VII.—EXPERIMENTS on POTATOS at CONNECTICUT, UNITED
SratEs. SuMMARY of the PRoDUCE of MARKETABLE TUBERS per
Acre, Average of four years, 1878-1881. Quantities in bushels.
Tubers per acre | Gain over unmanured
Manures per acre
In light | In heavy | In light | In heavy
soil soil soil soil
bushels | bushels | bushels ‘pashels | Ge bushels
No manure. is Ge ee 97-9 ly Whe
Nitrate of soda, 200 Ibs. . é -| 20 98:5 13°3 | 0°6
Superphosphate, 300 Ibs. . } a | 132:1 25°4 34:2
Muriate of potash, 200 lbs. : - | 965 118°7 30°8 20°8
Superphosphate, ane and nitrate
of soda . : d . | 138-9 193°3 732 | 95-4
The data thus given shows that in each case there were
considerably more potatos grown per acre on the “heavy”
than on the “ light ’’ soil.
Thus, without manure, there was obtained on the “light”’
soil about 652 bushels of marketable potatos per acre, while the
‘‘heavy ”’ soil yielded nearly 98 bushels. Nitrate of soda alone
raised the produce on the “ light”’ soil about 18 bushels per acre,
but less than 1 bushel per acre on the ‘‘ heavy ”’ soil. Super-
phosphate alone is seen to confirm very remarkably the results
obtained at Rothamsted, by producing considerably more
potatos per acre than the nitrate of soda alone. Thus on the
“light” soil there was a yield of 91 bushels per acre, and on the
“heavy ’’ soil a yield of 132 bushels per acre, a gain over the
unmanured of 25°4 bushels, and 342 bushels per acre, respectively.
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 57
Muriate ofpotash alone, gave a better result on the“ light” soil than
did the superphosphate, but a worse result on the “heavy ”’ soil,
pointing to the fact that the “ heavy” soil contained a sufficient
supply of available potash, but that it was lacking in assimilable
phosphorie acid.
A mixture of superphosphate, potash, and nitrate of soda,
raised the crop of tubers on the “light” soil to nearly 189
bushels per acre, and on the “ heavy ”’ soil to more than 193
bushels per acre, a gain over the unmanured of 73 bushels on
the “ light”’ soil, and of 95 bushels on the “ heavy ”’ soil.
The incapacity of the potato crop to avail itself of the
supplied nitrogen in manure, in the absence of a sufficient avail-
able supply of mineral constituents, is here very strikingly
illustrated on each description of soil.
Table VIII. is an illustration of experiments on the growth
of tomatos at New Jersey. The figures show the yield of fruit
per acre, without manure, with various artificial manures, and
with farmyard manure. The quantities are given in pounds.
TABLE VIII.—EXPERIMENTS on TOMATOS at NEW JERSEY. YIELD of
FRUIT per ACRE. Quantities in pounds.
Quantity of | Gain over
Manure per acre reas
uit unmanured
lbs. lbs.
Nomanure . : : ; : : 452 --
Nitrate of soda, 160 lbs, : : : : : 646 194
Superphosphate and potash . : 600 148
Nitrate of soda, superphosphate and potash . : 728 276
Farmyard manure, 20 tons . : - 698 246
The results show that without manure a yield of 452 lbs. of
tomatos per acre was obtained; nitrate of soda alone produced
646 lbs. of fruit, a gain of 194 lbs. per acre over the unmanured.
Superphosphate and potash applied together yielded less than
did the nitrate of soda alone ; but when these ingredients—the
minerals and the nitrogenous manure—were supplied in com-
bination, there was obtained 728 lbs. of tomatos per acre, a gain
over the unmanured of 276 lbs.
Farmyard manure applied at the rate of 20 tons per acre,
58 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
supplying all the necessary constituents of plant-food much more
abundantly than did the artificial manure, but in a less available
form, produced only 52 lbs. more fruit per acre than did the nitrate
of soda alone, thus showing that only a small proportion of the
nitrogen of the farmyard manure was in a sufficiently assimilable
form to be taken up by the tomatos, in their short period of
growth.
Table IX. shows experiments on peach trees at New Jersey.
The variety selected was ‘‘ Crawford’s Late.”
The results give the yield of peaches per acre of 180 trees, in
each of the five years 1887 to 1891 inclusive, and the total yield
of fruit for the five years. The quantities are given in number
of baskets of fruit per acre. Nine plots are quoted: No. 1
without manure; Nos. 2 to 8 with various artificial manures,
applied either alone or in combination; and No. 9 with farm-
yard manure.
TABLE IX.—EXPERIMENTS on PEACH TREES at NEW JERSEY. Variety:
“ Crawford’s Late.” Yield of Fruit per acre of 130 trees. Each year
and total of five years, 1887-1891. Quantities given in number of
Baskets.
Total
Plot No. Manures per acre 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 yield
5 years
Baskets | Baskets | Baskets | Baskets | Baskets} Baskets
1 |Nomanure . . -1 107° | 389 11 | 250 26
2 | Nitrate of soda 150 lbs. . 82 | 150 32 | 247 26 537
3 | Superphosphate of lime
| 350 lbs. ; : .| 163 | 225 71 364 | 117 940
4 | Muriate of potash 150 Ibs.| 124 | 230 | 118 | 497 | 148 |1,112
5 | Nitrate of soda and
superphosphate . of aan 345 99 | 468 | 182 | 1,235
6 Nitrate of soda and
potash . : .| 114 | 295 167 | 455 52 | 1,083
7 |Superphosphate and
| potash . . .| 174 | 322 | 160 | 432 | 169 | 1,247
8 | Superphos: Potash and
nitrate of soda . .| 152 | 419 153 592 156 | 1,472
9 | Farmyard manure 20 tons} 148 434 163 612 169 | 1,526
This experimental orchard was planted in April 1884, and I
understand is still going on. The most recent report to hand says :
“The trees on most of the plots are looking well for trees of their
age, and that the differences between plot and plot are becoming
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 59
more marked every year. ‘The trees on plot 1, which have
received no manure since the commencement of the experiment,
are making but feeble growth and show but little fruit. On
plot 2, which receives nitrate of soda alone, the trees differ from
plot 1 only in the colour of the leaves, which are darker. On
plot 3, receiving superphosphate alone, the leaves are large and
more uniform in size than on plots 1 and 2; there is a better
production of fruit, but it is reported of small size. On plot 4,
with muriate of potash, the leaves are not so large or uniform
in size as those on plot 3; they are, however, of a darker colour,
and the fruit is fully as good if not better in quality. Plot 5,
receiving a mixture of nitrate of soda and superphosphate, shows
leaves of good colour, uniformly large size, and increased pro-
duction of fruit. Plot 6, with a manurial mixture of nitrate of
soda and potash, the trees are reported to have a peculiar
appearance, nearly all the small lower side branches have died,
and the main branches are long and bare of foliage, except
towards the top where they appear healthy and fruitful; conse-
quently this plot gives a smaller production of peaches than
plot 5 or than plot 7, which receives superphosphate and potash,
but no nitrogenous manure. On plot 8, receiving a mixture of
superphosphate, potash, and nitrate of soda, the trees are of
uniform size, leaves healthy, and fruit of good quality. These
are reported as the best row of trees in the orchard. On plot 9,
receiving an application of twenty tons of farmyard manure per
acre the trees are reported to have suffered somewhat from the
over-bearing in the season of 1890, and it is thought a few
will die.”’
Looking at the figures given in Table IX., the results show
in a very remarkable manner the influence of climate on fruit
production. The year 1889 produced in most cases the smallest
quantity of peaches per acre, while the immediately succeeding
year 1890, gave by far the largest quantity of fruit per acre,
both without manure and under all conditions of manuring. It
is seen that in 1889, the worst year of the five, the range of
produce is from eleven baskets of fruit obtained without manure
to 167 baskets obtained by the application of nitrate of soda and
potash, being slightly in excess of the production by farmyard
manure. In the best year of the five, namely 1890, the range
of produce is from 247 baskets of peaches obtained by nitrate of
60 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
soda alone, being three baskets less than was grown without
manure, to 612 baskets per acre obtained by farmyard manure.
There was a considerable decline of fruit again in 1891, a result
doubtless due in part to the exceedingly large production in the
previous year, but also to climatal influences.
The total yield of peaches for the five years was, without
manure, 553 baskets per acre; with nitrate of soda alone
587 baskets, that is sixteen baskets less than was obtained with-
out manure, showing that the trees with nitrogenous manure
alone produced wood and luxuriance of foliage rather than matu-
ration and yield of fruit. Superphosphate alone gave 940 baskets
per acre, a marked increase over the unmanured plot, or over
No. 2 with nitrate of soda, without minerals; muriate of potash
alone raised the yield of peaches to double that obtained either
without manure or with nitrate of soda. Thus, mineral manures,
supplying potash and phosphoric acid, tend very largely to the
encouragement of fruit buds, and to the production of fruit—in
other words, to maturation; while nitrogenous manures favour
luxuriance of growth and plant-cell formation.
A combination of nitrate of soda and superphosphate pro-
duced in the five years 1,235 baskets of peaches, a similar
quantity being grown on plot 7 with superphosphate and potash
without nitrogen. But when a mixture of superphosphate,
potash, and nitrate of soda was given, a total produce of 1,472
baskets of fruit was harvested. The highest total yield was
however obtained on the farmyard manure plot, viz., 1,526
baskets of fruit, although in three years out of the five one or
other of the artificially manured plots exceeded the farmyard
manure plot in yield.
In conclusion, a careful consideration of the different points
| have endeavoured thus briefly to place before you, cannot fail
to impress the fact that to manure horticultural soils and crops
efficiently, means to-day something more than to incorporate
into the earth an exceptionally liberal amount of such a varying
substance as farmyard or stable manure, vegetable composts, and
the like, which may take many years to yield all the effects of
which they may be capable. Further, an excessive accumulation
of organic matter in the soil is apt to turn it into a breeding
place for injurious insects, or of parasitic productions. A mode-
rate use of what are termed “ natural manures,” supplemented
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 61
by a suitable addition of concentrated commercial fertilisers, for
the purpose of rendering the former more rapidly available in
order to force particular garden products “ out of season,’ should
commend itself to the horticulturist on account of the directness
with which he can thus reach the object in view. Both good
economy and the preference for a healthy and vigorous condition
of our cultivated plants advise a change from an indifferent
system of manuring to one of a more rational character.
Curiously enough the ready availability of the best and most
concentrated artificial fertilisers is sometimes used as an argu-
ment against their use, as compared with slower or more lasting
manures. Ifa manure lasts, it simply means that the return for
its cost is delayed, the capital it represents yielding no interest
untilit is realised. I would emphasise the fact that a well-chosen
artificial manure should act promptly and decisively upon
the crop, or upon the particular plant to which it may be
applied.
It is hoped that the facts now laid before you will assign to
artificial manures their proper place in the garden, the conserva-
tory, and the orchard, and will direct the attention of the
horticulturist and the orchardist to the great value of these
concentrated fertilisers, which have hitherto been overlooked or
but insufficiently appreciated.
DISCUSSION.
Mr. A. D. Hatt, Principal of the South Hastern Agricultural
College, suggested that the lecturer, and still more so, many of
the gardeuing papers, laid far too much stress on the composition
of particular plants as a guide to their manurial treatment. It
was Liebig’s initial theory that it was only necessary to put into
the soil the ash constituents (and nitrogen) taken out by each
crop, but experimental evidence and practical experience had
shown not only that this view was incorrect, but that in many
cases the very constituent that was least in amount in the
plant’s composition was the one upon which its growth mainly
depended under ordinary conditions of cropping. To give
some examples from the Rothamsted figures; swedes are
usually grown with superphosphate or other phosphatic manure
alone, yet a crop of swedes removes only 22 lbs. of phosphoric
62 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
acid per acre from the soil as against 98 lbs. of nitrogen and
80 lbs. of potash; a clover crop is practically independent of
nitrogen manuring, despite the 102 lbs. it contains per acre.
Ordinary arable soil, and still more so garden soil, contains at
least one hundred times as much plant food as the plant can
remove, though only part is in a condition immediately available;
there is generally one particular constituent the plant finds a
difficulty in obtaining, and which must be supplied in excess as
manure. Given this excess in one direction, the plant can feed
itself in other respects, but the particular constituent each crop
needs can only be decided by actual experiment, which in the
case of garden crops has rarely been carried out.
But the special point which the speaker wished to bring
before the attention of gardeners was the advisability of using
pure unmixed artificial manures, instead of the compounded
articles to which they generally trusted. There were three dis-
advantages in using these ready mixed manures; they did not know
what they were using, and so had no means of reasoning back
from the results they obtained, and thus accumulating experience
for future use; they paid absurd prices for even the good mixtures;
and they had no protection from absolute fraud.
Many of the fertilisers commonly employed by gardeners had
been sent to the speaker for analysis, and latterly he had made
a point of collecting and examining all he saw advertised in the
gardening papers; as a general rule they contained organic
nitrogen and sulphate of ammonia, sometimes also nitrogen in
nitrate of soda, horn dust, &c. The phosphatic part of the manure
was generally bone meal, often dissolved bone or superphosphate
was also added; potash was present as kainit, but often omitted;
while fish-meal or ground cake residues were sometimes employed
as a general organic basis for the manure.
The following table gives the result of these analyses. The
samples examined were either portions of large consignments or
were the contents of the shilling tins that are commonly sold,
and as it is practically impossible for the maker to deliver each
small parcel of uniform composition, the names of the makers
are not published.
The valuation attached to each manure is arrived at by a
method which should be understood by every gardener, as it is
only by this means that the price demanded for any manure
68
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE.
004 .10d 00} 10d
ClF
"898
"S16
LV8
u04 rod
“SGL
‘SE6
nop
oned (|6T “ON/TT ‘ON/OT ON 6 ON
paurvays
_ 104 22d) 104 xed
GF | VIF |
ee ae:
S60OL | SPIT | “S62 |
G8-h |8L1:6 €0-T
66-8 | L-€ ee
€6-6 | P-L Gab
EL-L L9-G 3
i 6-9 tne
12-0 = a
9-G |Go-L 8hg
GE |S9-FL GbE
96 | 61-8
LE-6
SlF
m04 od u04 10d uoyz10d uoys10d |
u04 10d u04 alana uo} 10d
‘SOL | OOF | CEF | OCF
$26 “*61B ‘896. | “8081 |
B1-98 96. 9-8 | GT
— | gezear | —
99-5 $8 68 | 9-81
— | | 88 | ¥0
cco | | ng | ae
— (909 | %0 | 98-1
OL 0-6 G9 SEL
z9.2e) — ele F9-98
Leah.) — Let | 18-4
ae
LON 9'°ON GON F ‘ON
OCF | SIF | OsF
|
S18 | “SLOT | “sgg
903 |1hF | eh
gI-3 ig0.9 | —
88-6 GoG § g.L
mh gate
— | tt |z6-1
— |42.0 | 982.0
$9.9 | 8-§ LP
BLIL | 686) #LE
29.21 | SPI 8e8
€°ON Z°ON TON
te a * 901d pastwoapy
?
* m0} rod uoTyenT{e A
. . .
"O2p ‘pueg
Ysvyod
“
(aTqnjosur) ‘
(arqntos) ploy ofaoydsoud
“c
eImowWuly sv
OYVIJIN' SB ke
((12}0}) U8SOI}IN
‘Ox “19]9VIT OLUVSIO
oIN4SLOTW
64 JOURNAL OF THE™ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
can be fairly estimated. The method consists in summing up in
a mixed manure the value of each constituent—nitrogen, phos-
phoric acid, and potash—from the value of these substances as
they can be bought in an unmixed condition. For example,
nitrate of soda contains about 16 per cent. of nitrogen, and can
be bought at £8 per ton; it follows, therefore, that in nitrate of
soda ,}, of a ton (or 1 per cent.) of nitrogen, costs 10s., since
there is nothing else of value in the nitrate of soda.
Again, basic slag, containing 17 per cent. of phosphoric acid,
can be bought for £2. 5s. per ton, so that we can allow 45s.
divided by 17=:2s. 9d., for the value of ;3, of a ton of phos-
phoric acid ; if the phosphoric acid is in a soluble condition it
will be worth 4s. for the +55 of a ton, since superphosphate
containing lu per cent. of soluble phosphoric acid costs about
£2. 10s.; lastly we can estimate 4, ton of potash to be worth
about 4s., since kainit, with 11 to 12 per cent. of potash, costs
about £2. 5s.
Taking these values and the analysis of the first manure on
our list (which is one of those most widely used by gardeners),
we see that it contains 4'7 per cent. of nitrogen; in one ton of
the manure there is therefore 4°7 hundredths of a ton of nitrogen
worth 4°7 x 10s.=£2. 7s.; the insoluble phosphoric acid amounts
to 7°5 hundredths, worth 7°5 x2s. 9d.=£1. Os. 73d., and as
there is no potash or soluble phosphoric acid present the total
value of one ton of the manure is £3. 7s. 7}d., instead of the
£20 or so for which it is sold.
The last three manures are unmixed manures that can
be obtained at the present time from any merchant for about
the prices mentioned for lots of one ton or more; of course for
smaller quantities a somewhat higher price must be paid, but
not to the inordinate extent demanded in the mixtures commonly
sold. As in two cases the valuation is greater than the price, it
is evident that the price taken for nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and
potash in all the valuations is not unfair. In the table one
manure stands out as an honourable exception (No. 6), which,
on account of the almost complete solubility of all its constituents
and its high degree of purity and concentration, is well worth
the money asked for it.
In the table no mention is made of a further class of
so-called silicate and slag manures, which contain no appreciable
ARTIFICIAL MANURES AND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE. 65
amount of either nitrogen, phosphoric acid, or potash, and are
consequently devoid of fertilising properties; these substances,
despite their specious advertisements and numerous testimonials,
should be let severely alone. Road-scrapings are much more
valuable material.
Speaking generally, the gardener is chiefly short of phos-
phoric acid; the dung he uses is proportionally richer in nitrogen
and potash than in phosphoric acid, so that if he supplements
his dung by dressings of steamed bone flour or basic slag in the
winter, he will keep his soil in excellent condition. A little
nitrate of soda is further very useful when forcing an early crop
or raising a heavy crop rapidly, since in these cases it is not
always possible for the nitrogen of the soil to change into
an assimilable condition rapidly enough for the needs of the
plant.
Where one of these compound manures is wanted a
mixture of four parts of steamed bone flour, two parts rape dust
or fish meal, two parts kainit, one part superphosphate, and one
part sulphate of ammonia will make an excellent cheap all-round
fertiliser, costing about £4 a ton, and worth more than most of
those usually sold. But it should not be forgotten that this,
like mest concentrated manures, should not come into direct
contact with the delicate roots of plants, but should be mixed
with the potting soil some time before it is used.
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER
GARDENS.
By My. A. Dean, F.R.H.S.
[Read April 27, 1897.]
WHETHER the practice of bedding out diverse plants in flower
gardens annually, or more often, be right or wrong, at least it
has behind it some half-century of existence, and so long as the
practice remains all effort should be directed to making the best
of it. That strong opinions antagonistic to the practice have
been put forward influentially there can be no doubt, but if it be
objectionable, at least it dies hard; and if it be otherwise, then
K
66 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
will it endure for yet a long period. We owe the bedding system
chiefly to the introduction into flower gardens from time to time
of large numbers of diverse and beautiful plants, chiefly tender,
that do not make individually any great display, or give marked
effects ; but which, grouped in masses, have and do give exceed-
ing brilliancy of coloration, and in that way constitute great
attraction for those who appreciate such effects. That, to a large
extent, summer bedding has lent itself in the past to the pro-
duction of garish, and sometimes almost vulgar effects and com-
binations, there can be no doubt. Happily, there has been
material improvement during the past ten years, and now the
tendency seems to be, whilst employing material in exceeding
variety, yet so far to tone coloration as to produce effects that
are distinctly pleasing and refined. Nodoubt such improvements
have done much to help the bedding practice to a longer life
than well could have been the case had the old garish combina-
tions continued. But where flower beds are annually filled with
tender or semi-tender plants, specially to produce particular
summer results, it is obvious that such material could not remain
in the beds during the winter months without being either
destroyed by frost, or rendered so objectionable as to be the
reverse of decorative. That has indeed been the experience of
the system from its first inception ; and where existing, the rule
has yearly prevailed of planting the beds in spring, clearing off
the demoralised contents in the autumn, and then, as was at one
time the case, leaving the beds bare all the winter, or filling
them with some hardy material suited to produce flowers in the
spring, which, in turn, had to be cleared off to make room once
more for the summer bedders. Probably the prevailing bareness
of the beds during winter presented the severest element in any
indictment of the system of summer bedding, because a series of
bald bare beds on turf or gravel for one half the year was more
offensive than even none at all, and almost more so than were
some of the gaudy effects obtained from them in the summer,
whilst what may be described as winter bedding never has been
widely practised, and is indeed comparatively young. The practice
of filling the otherwise bald beds in the late autumn with various
hardy spring-flowering plants is almost relatively old, and had for
its pioneer Mr. J. Fleming, who at Cliveden did so much in the
huge beds on the lawn there, through the agency of such simple
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER GARDENS. 67
plants as Early Pansies, in colours blue, purple, and white ;
Forget-me-not, Silene pendula, Limnanthes Douglasii, Double
Daisies, and similar easily-raised plants, to secure on the surface
of the beds during winter some litle greenery, and in the late
spring very striking masses of colour. But in those days we
had not the hardy material at hand for the production of spring
bloom that is now so plentiful; and the Cliveden system, such as
it was, suffered from the fact, first, that the plants used were
for several months flat, and utterly ineffectual in affording garden
relief ; whilst most of them flowered so late that the spring had
almost become summer ere the floral beauty of the plants was
seen. Obviously in any method of bedding intended to make a
flower garden pleasing during the winter as well as spring, other
and very diverse material from that employed at Cliveden has to
be introduced, not only for the purpose of rendering beds, if not
gay in winter, at least interesting and pleasing, whilst it was
imperative that the blooming material should give its florescence
so early as March and April rather than in May or June.
It is interesting to turn for a moment to a very diverse form
of bedding, which was practised with such marked success by
the late William Wildsmith during what may be termed the palmy
days of Heckfield Place. There Mr. Wildsmith had a summer
garden of exceeding beauty, so far as it was possible for so
artificial a method of gardening as the bedding-out system offers
of true garden beauty. Helaboured whilst securing floral effects
always to furnish pleasing relief, and it was generally admitted
that of its kind few summer bedded-out gardens were more
beautiful or tasteful. Having to meet the requirements of a
family that were in their movements influenced by parliamentary
assemblages, it was needful to keep the flower-beds as well filled
in winter as in summer, and employing for carpets especially
certain hardy plants. These carpet edgings were retained in
the winter, and the places of the tender plants were taken by
small conifers, evergreen shrubs, hardy heaths, and many things
of similar character, including even dark-leaved beet, and thus
real winter-bedding was produced that was for the season of
the year invariably attractive. For the benefit of this form of
bedding a small nursery was maintained, some few things being
purchased yearly. But when the family left Heckfield for
London in February, the beds were dismantled and became bare
F 2
68 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
until the usual summer bedding again began. Thus, in the two
somewhat famous cases quoted, neither was really of the form
which it is desired to create. Since those days, in not a few
good gardens there has been seen considerable development.
Conifers, green and variegated shrubs in large variety, early
spring-blooming plants in exceeding abundance, and bulbs,
cheap and good, also in abundance, have been used in combina-
tion with admirable results; and if putting upon the garden
staff some additional labour, as well as of expense, on the main-
tenance account, yet have both extra labour and cost been amply
repaid, and some most beautiful effects produced. It is this
description of bedding which so truly merits the appellation of
winter and spring garden decoration.
I am not oblivious of the fact that some few years since the
able secretary of the Royal Horticultural Society read in this
hall a paper entitled “A Method of Winter Gardening,” and
whilst based very much on the same lines as my own paper, yet
he specially advised the growing of conifers and shrubs in pots |
for the purpose, plunging them where needed in the beds during the
winter. To hismethodsI take no exception. What any one has found
to be in his case good practice, he should boldly advocate, and
the Rey. Mr. Wilks does not lack courage. I can have no doubt
but that the vicarage garden at Shirley is both in winter and
spring fully as beautiful and as interesting as that paper,
January 14, 1890, indicated. But I take grave exception to his
iugubrious description of annually transplanted evergreen shrubs
which, he said, moved twice a year, soon put on a thin draggle-
tailed appearance, resembling broken-down beggars, &c. Well,
were that mine or general experience, I should not advocate the
use of these shrubs as I now do. I have not seen these appalling
results following from half-yearly transplantings, neither do I
think such is the usual experience of nurserymen. That a few
yearly may become too large, or perhaps thin of foliage, is
possible ; but so cheap are these things that a few dozens pur-
chased yearly, costs little, and always serves to keep a good stock
of useful stuff in hand. The nursery set apart for this particular
department of garden work should be on a north aspect, and the
soil deeply worked and well pulverised. Conifers and shrubs,
frequently lifted and planted, create clusters of fibrous roots,
which soon attach themselves to the soil, yet do not create
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER GARDENS. 69
luxuriant growth, as the chief object in view is to have small,
compact plants of good foliage and colour. Of course, after the
spring replanting into the nursery, an ample supply of water is
needful in dry weather, and special provision should always be
made for that purpose. Now as I have appended at the end of
this paper a list of conifers, shrubs, &c., specially suited for
winter bedding and frequent transplanting, I do not propose to
introduce names largely. I may say, however, that in compiling
the list, | am greatly indebted to Mr. Howard, Messrs. Veitch &
Sons’ able foreman at Coombewood, for efficient revision of the
contents. It will be seen that the range of selection of conifers
only is very great. Whilst size is a matter for the planter to
determine, nature has furnished in golden, silver, green in
shades, and even almost red or coppery hues, ample variety in
colour. Many of these conifers seem to show their special hues
all the more fully when somewhat restricted in growth, and
they, effectively employed, or blended, are most pleasing during
the dullest weather. Of shrubs such as Aucubas, Boxes, Hollies,
Kuonymuses, Mahonias, Ivies, Eleagnus, &c., there is great
variety, having diversely coloured leafage ; and of really compact
growing, effective, green-leaved varieties, there are great
numbers. Then there are some that berry freely, and in that
sense alone are most effective. Skimmias, frequently trans-
planted, are at Glen Eyre, Southampton, literally loaded with
red berries all the winter, the birds doing no harm. In the
same way the compact habited Aucubas will berry marvellously,
and wear a very bright aspect all the winter. Then Pernettyas
also, if grown specially in peaty soil, berry abundantly, and thus
become very effective. But we need not be limited entirely to
evergreen shrubs, for most beautiful for early spring blooming
are the Forsythias, flowering currants, scarlet Pyruses, the
yellow-tufted Mahonias, and the pretty Daphne Mezereon.
All these, carefully treated, may be employed to decorate beds in
the spring.
Very valuable too are the Vincas, whether green or silvery.
These with some ivies, planted to form carpets or rings, may be
used to cover or enclose clumps of hyacinths or other bulbs,
whilst there are several hardy heaths that bloom early, and form
very charming features. In planting conifers and shrubs in
beds, if the plants be small, I should prefer grouping them into
70 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. -
small clumps, rather than merely sticking in one here and there,
to give some relief, as is so commonly seen.
Practically the gardener in planting should aim to produce an
illusion to the effect that the beds thus temporarily planted are
really so permanently, intermingling between the evergreens such _
plants, bulbs, or otherwise, as he may have at disposal, and
of which there is now such a wealth to choose from. Any
attempt to obtain large bold masses of colour, whether from bulbs
or hardy spring flowers, should not be tolerated. Those who plant
as may be seen in London parks and gardens huge flat mono-
tonous beds of bulbs, and those who profess to admire them,
have about as much taste as have those pictorial connoisseurs,
who find more of art and beauty on a street hoarding than
within the National Gallery. Not one whit better are the masses
of Silene, Arabis, Myosotis, Violas, &c., often seen in gardens in
the spring, and all of which should be banished from garden
beddings. It may naturally be asked why take so much of
trouble in annually planting and replanting flower beds? Why
not let them be of a permanent character? Those who prefer to
do so may of course have them permanent, merely adding a few
fresh plants from time to time, to afford in that way a little
variety. But permanent beds means considerable sameness
from year to year, as well as all the year round, whilst every
gardener knows that if real justice is to be done to the plants
utilised, whether they be shrubby or herbaceous or tender, the soil
must occasionally be deeply worked and manured, for it is only
in that way that striking effects, whether mixed or otherwise,
can be obtained. Then, whilst even in permanent beds flowering
plants of ordinary kinds may be planted and removed, as occasion
or season may necessitate, conifers and shrubs soon become too
large, and require all the space hitherto allotted to the flowers, so
that the latter become of trifling importance, whereas the beds
were originally chiefly designed to enable them to exhibit their
decorative qualities. The frequent transplanting of the bedding
material may entail considerable labour, but what is there in
gardening worth having, that does not entail labour to produce ?
Still further the value of such labour is less to be judged by its
cost, or time occupied, than by the results obtained. Now there
can be no objection to the planting of beds on the mixed plan
every autumn, thus saving the spring labour. The advantage
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER GARDENS. “at
resulting is that the autumn is the best time for the planting of
all hardy things, that work is just then less exacting than it is in
the spring, and that there is in the renewed planting, largely
perhaps with fresh material, certainly with varied material, in
the autumn, very desirable charm, because the winter is always
a dull garden season, and any new or distinctive effects which
can then be produced furnish a charm for garden enjoyment,
even more acceptable then than is the case in the early summer,
when nature has done so much to add charm to gardening.
The planting of the beds with conifers and shrubs varied in
form and in coloration, amongst which are interspersed bulbs in
great variety in clumps, also hardy perennial foliage and flowering
plants, that give their effects during the winter and spring
months, admits of material variation in the late spring when
much of this latter may be removed and be replaced with such
tender plants as the taste of the gardener may prefer, or the
particular positions in the beds may render suitable. Certainly
in this case, whilst having the beds filled with plants of some
description all the year round, it would not be practicable to
produce in them those glaring or flat and formal masses of colour
at any time, such as large groups of scarlet pelargoniums, yellow
calceolarias, gazanias, or marigolds, blue lobelias or even duller
petunias, or heliotrope give in the summer, or wallflowers, forget-
me-nots, silene, and similar plants, or hyacinths, tulips, and
narcissi are made to do in the spring.
But it must not be assumed because these respective plants
and myriads of others may not be thus employed en masse in
garden decoration, that they may not be judiciously and even
liberally utilised in winter or summer bedding. When some half-
century since, or in relation to an event of exceeding interest,
which is celebrated this year, shall I suggest sixty years ago,
** mixed beds ”’ in flower gardens were common; they contained
even at the best but a very poor floral representation, as com-
pared with what can be furnished to-day, not only in hardy but
in tender material. Hence such beds were not often very attrac-
tive, and equally often not tidy. No doubt the bedding system
as it is called largely grew out of a revulsion against such poor
unattractive displays, and led to the extreme of huge masses of
glaring colours and unhappy combinations which in time resulted.
No such reason for revulsion now exists against mixed bedding, for
72 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
it is so easy to have such beds singularly varied and gay, because
of the material at the disposal of the gardener. ‘Take, for in-
stance, hardy foliage plants. Who that has a stock of that
much neglected but singularly effective thing, the Golden
Valerian, but has found its clumps of foliage to be of striking
beauty in the early spring months. A few of these dotted here
and there in beds furnish most welcome colour ; very effective
also are the variegated conifers for this purpose. Then the well-
known ribbon grass, found plentiful enough in some old gardens
in huge clumps, is easily divided with a spade, and such clumps,
if medium size, planted in the autumn are most effective in
giving colour in the spring. Even the well-known variegated
cress, so easily raised from seed sown in the summer outdoors,
will, if planted in small clumps, give very effective patches of gold
for a long season. Most effective as a clump carpet is the too
little known golden-tipped Sedum which assumes so charming
an aspect in the early spring; and Sedum glaucum is also of a
useful nature. There are two excellent members of the Arabis
family, albida variegata, silvery, and mollis variegata, golden,
each hardy and pleasing, and if dark colours be needed, it is
easy to have strong plants of the claret-leaved Sweet William,
from a summer sowing of seed, or of the metallic-leaved Ajuga,
which is so hardy. These are but a few of this section of very
hardy material useful for winter and spring bedding. As to
flowering plants, all hardy and blooming early, they are legion.
Karhest of all is the white Arabis, so often and unpleasantly seen
in great abundance in gardens, but which should be found only
in moderate clumps. How soon is this succeeded by the pretty
light blue Myosotis dissitiflora which flowers so profusely from
plants raised from seed sown in August. Clumps of this Forget-
me-not are so pleasing in the early spring. The several Aubrietias
also, how hardy they are, and established clumps lift and trans-
plant admirably in the autumn. A good cluster of Violacea or
Olympica, or of the reddish-flowered Leichtlini, some 12 inches
across when in bloom, is rendered most attractive when surrounded
by a natural edging of silvery Vinca, or indeed of any whitish-
leaved plant. These Aubrietias may be propagated readily through
the agency of young tips as cuttings in the early summer, or by
dividing the plants after they have bloomed, or by saving seed
and sowing as soon as ripe, the majority of the plants coming
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER GARDENS. 73
true. Primroses, of which there are so many diverse colours,
come easily from a sowing made early in the spring, the plants
being dibbled out during the summer into a nursery-ground, from
whence they can be transplanted into the beds in the autumn.
Border polyanthuses, to follow in bloom a week or two later, may
be sown at the same time and be similarly treated. Both these
members of the great Primula family render immense service in
the spring garden; indeed, strong plants often bloom freely
through the winter. These strains are all large-flowered, of
many colours, mostly rich and striking, and should be found
abundantly in every garden, for they deservedly rank amongst the
earliest and most beautiful of spring flowers. Where selected
plants of those that give bold heads of colour, white, yellow, red,
crimson, or purple are divided, and thus increased so as to enable
clumps of three or five plants to be put out, or where from a
batch of seedlings of a year’s growth plants giving analogous
colours be selected and planted up into clumps the following
autumn in the beds, they give beautiful and long-enduring
effects. This is a section of hardy spring flowers far too little
used for such purposes. A stock should be raised from seed
every year. A beautiful yellow-flowered plant, cheaply obtained,
is the dwarf Alyssum saxatile, which can be got in quantity
from seed easily. So also too can be had dwarf Belvoir yellow
and tall yellow wallflowers, seed being sown at the end of May,
and the plants when large enough dibbled out 12 inches apart
into rather poor soil, to render them compact and sturdy for
transplanting in October. Striking yellows also, and early, are the
Doronicums, especially Awstriacwm and Harpur Crewe. Clumps
of these transplant readily, and in bloom are singularly effective.
Yellow is also obtainable from old plants of early pansies and
violas. Of the former, selected seedlings of a yellow strain often
give the best results; and of the latter, Bullion, Ardwell Gem,
Yellow Boy, Lutea grandiflora, and the soft-hued Lemon Queen,
are early and valuable. Of all pansies no doubt the best early
blue is the well-known Blue King. This capital variety has not
yet been excelled for early work ; other good blues being Holy-
rood, Archie Grant, The Tory; and of the smaller-flowered
violas Blue Cloud, True Blue, Blue Bell are fairly early, and,
like the pansies, easily propagated by division or from cuttings.
Those who prefer better or parti-coloured flowers can find an
74 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
abundance of them in both pansies and violas. ‘The best white
of the latter section are, doubtless, Countess of Hopetoun and
Snowflake; but the best early white pansy I have seen is
Messrs. Sutton & Sons’ seedling strain of Giant White, which
gives from established plants very early in the spring big clumps
of pure white flowers. The finest of the strain propagated by
cuttings soon furnish wonderfully effective bedding material.
If purples or yellows be desired they can be secured in quantity
in the same cheap way. As to violas, those who have seen the
stock plants left out in beds all the winter in Messrs. Cannell &
Sons’ grounds at Kynsford, when in bloom in April, can better
estimate the exceeding value of these hardy plants for spring
beddings, than where no such experience has been obtained.
It is not possible in any reference to spring gardening to over-
look the merits of the Giant White double daisy and of its rich
coloured compeer, King of Crimsons. These two are un-
doubtedly the best, and, planted up thickly in clumps of several
plants, are very pleasing. But how many of these hardy early |
blooming plants there are that may be utilised. The perennial
candy-tufts, of which there are several, especially corresfolia and
Garrexiana; the beautiful golden and orange globe flowers,
Trollius; the too seldom seen double white tuberous saxifrage, the
rich scarlet-flowered Anemone fulgens, the charming blue forms
appenina and blanda, the double white form of nemorosa, so
effective in clumps; or, not least, early planted clumps of the
Irish poppy Anemone and its beautiful varieties which bloom so
finely and so profusely in the spring.
But even in referring to this somewhat long, yet very im-
perfect, list of hardy spring flowering plants I have hardly
mentioned bulbs, yet in no case can these be left out of any
effort to make flower-beds gay in the spring. Objectionable as
to me are large flat masses of any bulbs, however striking in
coloration, it is not possible to over-estimate the charm which
moderate clumps of crocuses in colours, of snowdrops, scillas,
chinodoxas, grape hyacinths, tulips, narcissi, and hyacinths
lend to beds when judiciously planted. To attempt the produc-
tion of big colour masses is not only to defeat the object in view,
that of creating pleasing and refined effects, but also exposes at
once all the trumps in the planter’s hand. That is the too
common fault of all bedding, whether of spring or summer, for
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER GARDENS. 75
one glance round a flower-garden reveals everything. What is
so much more desirable is the combining shrubs and creepers
with bulbs and hardy flowering or foliage plants, so that the
flowers may be found rather in nooksand slight seclusions than in
exposed masses, new objects thus indirectly meeting the eye at every
turn. Still farther, if something be getting out of bloom others
are succeeding. [am not sure whether, conducted on the lines
set out in this paper, winter and spring flower gardening, but the
spring bedding especially, may not be found more attractive than
any display of summer bedding, especially when seen under the
glare of hot sunshine, ever can be. In any case, it is garden
decoration of the cheapest, and may be more or less practised in
everybody’s garden.
List oF THE Most SurItTABLE CONIFERS AND SHRUBS FOR
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING.
Variegated Shrubs.
Aucuba japonica maculata—the old Aucuba of gardens.
Buxus argentea variegata.
» aurea 4
» japonica aurea.
*Kuonymus radicans.
* 4, japonica aurea variegata.
- » % » Marginata.
? ” alba ”
*Hurya japonica variegata.
*Kleagnus pungens _,,
* 5 maculata aurea.
Krica vulgaris aurea.
Hedera arborea argentea variegata.
4) ) aurea 9
3 mn chrysophylla.
* These are suitable for favourable situations only, being
rather tender.
76 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Shrubs with Green foliage.
Aucuba japonica mascula.
‘. ‘ feemina.
PM . vera nana.
Andromeda floribunda.
Buxus sempervirens.
Berberis Aquifolium.
Cotoneaster microphylla.
Cerasus rotundifolia—the Laurel.
» caucasica.
» lusitanica.
de ‘6 myrtifolia.
*Huonymus japonica.
*Eleagnus macrophyllus.
Krica herbacea carnea.
» vagans alba.
» Vulgaris Alportil.
Hedera arborea.
o. be fructo lutea.
Kalmia latifolia.
Laurustinus. Dwarf French variety.
Ligustrum japonicum.
Phillyrea Vilmoriniana.
Rhododendron ponticum.
Skimmia japonica,
- fragrans.
as = oblata.
Yucea gloriosa.
»» Yrecurva.
* These are suitable for favourable situations only, being
rather tender.
Conifers, Golden variegated.
Cupressus Lawsoniana lutea.
Juniperus chinensis aurea.
a japonica _
Retinospora plumosa _,,
* pisifera _,,
Thuya Verveeneana.
», occidentalis lutea.
WINTER AND SPRING BEDDING IN FLOWER GARDENS. 77
Comfers, Silver variegated.
Cupressus Lawsoniana alba variegata.
* as » Spica nana.
Juniperus japonica alba variegata.
_ Retinospora plumosa argentea.
| Comfers, Bronze foliage.
Cryptomeria elegans.
Retinospora ericoides.
Conifers, Glaucous foliage.
Abies pungens glauca.
Cupressus Lawsoniana Allumii,
- . argentea.
a a Fraserii.
4 A nana glauca.
Retinospora squarrosa.
Comfers, Green foliage.
Cupressus Lawsoniana.
99 73 Shawii. One of the best.
y ” ericoides.
” 9 eracilis.
Juniperus chinensis.
" Virginiana.
DISEASES OF PLANTS.
By Mr. Grorce Masser, F.L.S.
[Read May 11, 1897.]
IXvERYDAY experience clearly shows that the cultivator of plants
who does not take into consideration, and at the same time
endeavour to guard against, the possible injury capable of being
done by fungi to the plants under his charge, commits a mistake.
This applies more especially to those cases where large numbers
of plants of the same kind are grown close together. I have
been informed by tomato growers that a loss of from £100 to
78 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
£200 is not unusual in the crop of a single house in cases where
the disease has been exceptionally severe. Adopting the pre-
ventive method, the cost of spraying and promptly removing
suspicious plants from a large tomato-house would not cost
more than £2, probably not nearly so much. Unfortunately the
too general conservative spirit of our gardeners rebels against
the idea of anticipation, and argues that it is absurd to expend
money in combating a disease which does not in reality exist.
This indifference on the part of gardeners is fully explained
by the still greater indifference displayed by the majority of
those who profess to educate gardeners in all the branches
appertaining to their profession; and in this respect it is, to say
the least, a regrettable fact that our country is unique in not
including in the programme of essentials, a broad knowledge of
the life-history of those groups of fungi which are admittedly one
of the pests of horticulture.
It is sometimes urged that practical gardeners have neither
the time nor the inclination to become specialists in the study
of fungi; an argument which is as unnecessary as unreasonable.
What gardeners should know is, the broad outlines of the
peculiar mode of life of injurious fungi, which differs so much
from that of the plants with which they are most familiar.
Armed with this amount of knowledge, the cultivator of plants
would be able to anticipate the attacks of his foes, would be
enabled to carry into practice the suggestions made by specialists
on the subject of plant diseases ; and, finally, would be able to
convey in an intelligible form the symptoms of disease when
asking for advice.
At present this, unfortunately, is not the rule ; diseased plants
are submitted wholesale, usually accompanied by the statement
that the plants were quite healthy until a fungus showed itself
on some particular part of the plant. The inevitable reply to
such, that it is too late to effect a cure, and all that can be done
is to prevent the spread of the disease, is naturally disheartening,
and calculated to foster distrust as to the possibility of preventing
disease, This unfortunate condition of things will be under-
stood if it is remembered that when mushroom spawn is placed
in a mushroom-bed, some considerable time is required for the
spawn or myceliwm to grow and spread, before mushrooms
appear. The myceliwm or spawn is in function the exact
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 79
equivalent of the roots and leaves of a flowering plant ; that is,
it is that part of the fungus which takes in food, and when a
sufficient quantity of food has been accumulated, the mushroom
is produced on the surface of the bed. The mushroom, as
commonly understood, is not the entire fungus, but only its fruit,
which appears at the surface of the bed for the purpose of
enabling its seeds or spores as they are called, to be distributed
by wind or other agents. In like manner the myceliwm of
parasitic fungi is present in the tissues of the living plants on
which they grow, long before the fruit of the fungus appears on
the surface. As a matter of fact, when the fungus appears on the
surface of the plant it represents the last stage of the disease
and not the first; the injury has been done; the myceliwm has
been absorbing the food prepared by the plant for its own use,
the plant-cells are destroyed by the mycelvwm, and the fruit of
the fungus appears on the surface of the diseased plant for the
purpose of being carried by wind, insects, or spraying, on to the
leaves of other healthy plants, where the same course of develop-
ment takes place.
From the above account it will be seen how very necessary
it is to remove all traces of fungi that appear on living plants,
either by removing and burning the diseased parts, or when it
is not desirable to do this, then to spray or wash the affected
plants with some solution that will destroy all spores present.
If this method of promptly destroying all traces of fungi on
their first appearance is persistently carried out, there is but
little fear of an outbreak on a large scale, as it is quite as
impossible for fungi to appear in the absence of fungus spores as
it would be to expect a crop of peas to spring up without
having previously sown the seed necessary for producing the
same. The gardener should accustom himself to treat every
fungus, large or small, mildew or toadstool, in the same manner
that he treats weeds in a seed-bed, as something that may do a
great deal of injury, but which cannot possibly do any good.
The spores of fungi are exceedingly minute, and are readily
carried by currents of air, insects, birds, animals, &c., from one
place to another, and if such spores alight on the damp surface
of a leaf of the particular plant on which the fungus is parasitic,
the spore germinates at once, and within a very short time the
myceliwm has pierced the skin of the leaf and entered the tissues,
80 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
where it finds an abundance of food, and soon spreads through
the entire leaf. When this has taken place, it is too late to
spray ; no solution can kill the myceliwm present in the plant-
cells without also killing the leaf. The aim of the gardener
should be, by exercising the methods indicated above, to prevent
such inoculation from taking place, by a continuous warfare
against every form of fungus making its appearance. As a rule
a parasitic fungus attacks only one particular kind of plant, or
closely allied plants belonging to the same natural order ; con-
sequently, where numerous plants of the same kind are grown
in close proximity, it is necessary that a very sharp look-out
should be kept, and any plant showing symptoms of disease
should be promptly removed, and if of little value, be destroyed ;
or if too valuable it should be removed from the rest; as, should
the disease prove to be of a fungoid nature, neglect may result
in disaster. Unfortunately the gardener’s idea of a disease is
generally the simultaneous collapse of numerous plants, which
in most cases originates from a single individual being attacked
in the first instance ; therefore never delay doing all that can be
done, by promptly removing suspicious individuals, and after-
wards spray the entire batch of plants with some fungicide, so as
to destroy any spores that may possibly have spread from the
diseased plants before removal. It is not sufficient to pull up a
suspected plant and throw it down in a corner to die; the plant
so treated would in all probability die, but if it was attacked by
a fungus, the latter would not perish also, but continue to grow
and produce spores just the same as if the plant had been
allowed to stand. For the same reason, diseased plants should
not be thrown on to a rubbish heap, but thoroughly destroyed
by burning.
Most fungi differ very considerably from other plants in pro-
ducing two or more kinds of spores or reproductive bodies, which
serve different purposes. During the summer months most
parasitic fungi produce in rapid succession myriads of very
minute spores which are capable of germination the moment
they are ripe; these spores are distributed wholesale by wind,
rain, &c., and those that happen to alight on the leaf or young
branch of the plant on which they are capable of growing, ger-
minate and enter the tissues at once. By this means a disease,
when once present, spreads rapidly. A single mildewed apple
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 81
leaf may be the means of infecting an entire orchard within
a very short time, or a single “rusted’’ leaf of wheat may be
the means of destroying the prospect of a crop. At this state
the value of spraying is obvious; by applying a fungicide the
spores are destroyed, and the spread of the disease considerably
checked. The minute spores described above are known as
summer-spores, which, as already stated, germinate the moment —
they are ripe, their use being to enable the fungus to extend
its area, and this method continues so long as the plant on
which the fungus is parasitic continues to grow actively.
During the autumn, when the host-plant, as the plant is
called on which a fungus is parasitic, is ceasing vigorous
growth, the myceliwm of the fungus, which during the earlier
part of the year has given origin to summer-spores, now
begins to produce a totally different kind of spores, called winter-
spores or resting-spores. These winter-spores remain dormant
during the winter, and germinate the following spring, at the
time when the leaves of the host-plant are unfolding, their
use being to tide the fungus over that period of the year when
the host-plant is not in active growth.
From the above account it will be seen how very important
it is to collect and burn all diseased leaves and twigs, and not
allow them to remain on the ground under the plants from
which they have fallen. It is true that such diseased leaves,
if allowed to lie on the ground, usually decay and disappear
during the winter; but the resting-spores present in the tissues
of such diseased leaves do not perish, but remain in the soil
and germinate in due season, and in all probability a renewal
of the disease will follow. Here again is a case where pre-
ventive measures should be resorted to. Where a disease
has been known to exist during the previous season, the plants
should be sprayed at intervals of ten days during the period
of the expansion of the leaf-buds with a fungicide; as, not-
withstanding every care in the removal of diseased parts, it
is probable that spores may be lurking in crevices of the bark,
&e., and the fungicide would destroy all such, and greatly
lessen the chance of a return of the disease. For spraying
purposes a solution, consisting of half an ounce of potassium
sulphide dissolved in a gallon of water, may be used; this
will destroy most germinating spores, and, being clean, may
G
82 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
be used wholesale in greenhouses and places where Bordeaux
mixture could not be used, on account of the white-wash effect
produced on everything with which it comes in contact.
Potassium sulphide dissolves most readily in hot water, which
should be allowed to cool before spraying. Orchard trees or
vines that have been attacked by fungi the previous season may
be sprayed with a solution of sulphate of copper—one ounce to
three gallons of water—for the purpose of destroying resting-
spores. This fungicide can only be used early in spring, before
the leaf-buds begin to expand, otherwise the foliage is injured ;
hence it cannot be used in greenhouses and places where foliage
is present.
Numerous other preventive methods and fungicides have
been proved to be of value in checking specific diseases, but the
leading idea of this discourse is to give gardeners an idea as to
the varied methods followed by fungi in attacking their victims,
and more especially to thoroughly impress on their minds that
‘prevention is better than cure.”’
One group of very destructive parasitic fungi possess the
peculiarity of living on two distinct host-plants at different
periods of their existence. The too familiar mildew or rust of
wheat is an example of this kind, where two conditions of the
fungus grow on the wheat-plant, and a third on the leaves of
the barberry. Other examples pass one period of their existence
on branches of junipers, and another on the leaves of various
fruit trees. It is obvious that in those cases where it is
necessary for the fungus to pass from one host-plant to another
to complete its development, that the removal of one of the two
host-plants from the vicinity will arrest the progress of the
disease. Various other peculiarities possessed by fungi, which
it is impossible to crowd into a single talk on the subject, should
be known to gardeners.
The following illustrations of the mode of attack of well-
known forms of parasitic fungi will, it is hoped, enable the
previous remarks to be more clearly understood :—
Orcuip Lear Rust. (Gleosporiwm cinctum, Berk.)
This is the most generally distributed of fungus parasites
with which the cultivator of orchids has to contend. It does
not as a rule kill the host-plant, but the leaves are disfigured by
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 83
its presence, and in addition tov robbing the plant of a certain
amount of material elaborated for its own use, proves injurious
in rupturing the epidermis in many places, and thus facilitating
the escape of water from the leaf, and, as a consequence of which,
the balance of absorption and transpiration is upset. This
fungus may be considered as a very simple type of parasite,
inasmuch as, so far as is known, only summer-spores are formed,
but as the leaves of orchids are always present, the spores find a
suitable place for germination throughout the year; secondly,
the fungus completes its development on one and the same host-
plant.
Fic. 1.—Orcuip Lear Rust (Gleosporium cinctum).
(1) Portion of an orchid leaf showing the disease; natural size. (2) Portion of a
diseased patch, slightly magnified. (3) A fungus fruit showing the spores escaping in the
form of a tendril; more highly magnified. (5) Section or slice through a fungus fruit im-
bedded in the substance of an orchid leaf; highly magnified. (5) Spores of the fungus ;
magnified 400 times.
Inoculation takes place by the spores being conveyed by
some means on to the surface of a damp orchid leaf, germina-
tion takes place at once, and within a few hours the germ-tube,
or first-formed myceliwm produced by the germinating spore
G2
84 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
pierces the epidermis of the leaf, and enters the tissues, where it
spreads in the interior of the leaf-cells, finally rupturing the
epidermis to form its spores on the surface of the leaf.
The fruit appears in small patches a quarter to half an inch
across; these patches are at first pale green, then yellowish or
almost white, and in the case of fleshy leaves, sunk a little below
the general surface of the leaf, as if they had been pressed down
by the tip of a finger. When examined with a pocket-lens
each fruit. of which there are several on each pale patch, is seen
to be surrounded by a blackish ring, hence the specific name of
the fungus. :
The potassic sulphide solution mentioned above destroys the
germinating spores of this fungus, and as the parasite has been
observed on several different kinds of orchids, spraying all the
plants present in a house where the pest has been observed, is
necessary.
Rose Lear MinpEw (Spherotheca pannosa, Léy.).
This parasite appears in the spring or early summer as a
Fic. 2.—Rosr Lear Mitpew (Spherotheca pannosa).
Karly summer form of the disease, (1) A diseased rose leaf ; natural size. (2) Summer
Bpores, produced in chains; highly magnified. (3) A single summer-s i ;
magnified 300 times. : ’ ¥ ” eo anne ee
white or greyish mildew on the leaves and young shoots of rose
trees. When the disease is abundant it also attacks the fruit.
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 85
If a portion of this delicate grey mildew is examined under a
microscope, it will be seen to consist of a delicate felt of inter-
woven myceliwm resting on the surface of the leaf, and sending
numerous short suckers into the cells of the leaf on which
it is parasitic, for the purpose of absorbing food. When the
mycelium has been growing for some time it presents a delicately
frosted appearance, due to the presence of numerous upright
strings of exceedingly minute conidia or summer-spores. These
spores are scattered by wind as soon as they are ripe, and
germinate at once; and as these bodies are produced in rapid
succession throughout the summer months, it is easy to under-
stand how the disease spreads so rapidly after it once appears.
Fic. 3.—Rosr Lear Minpew (Spherotheca pannosa).
Winter form of the disease. (1) A rose fruit showing the winter-spore condition in the
form of minute black dots on the white mould; natural size. (2) A winter-fruit ; highly
magnified. (3) A cell containing eight winter-spores ; several of these cells are produced in
a fruit; highly magnified. (4) A single winter-spore germinating ; magnified 300 times.
If the white patches of mould, especially those present on
the more persistent parts of the rose tree, as young fruits and
shoots, are examined in August and throughout the autumn,
minute points not so large as a pin’s head will be seen in con-
siderable quantity; these are at first yellow, and finally blackish,
and are in reality fruits of a complex structure, containing
in their interior numerous winter-spores. If taken in hand
:
86 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
sufficiently early, spraying with potassic sulphide will check the
spread of the summer-spore condition, and consequently prevent
the formation of winter-spores, which remain dormant during
the winter, and germinate the following spring just about the
time when the leaf-buds have expanded. Diseased leaves that
have fallen should be collected and burned, otherwise the resting-
spore stage will develop on the dying leaves. All mildewed
twigs and fruits should also be cut away, otherwise the resting-
spores or winter-spores which are developed on these parts will
with certainty renew the disease the following spring. The
entire life of the fungus is spent on the rose tree.
Veutvety Mouup. (Sclerotinia Fuckeliana, De Bary.)
This fungus has two very different looking kinds of fruit.
The summer condition, which is the commonest of the two, is
often called Botrytis cinerea, and appears under the form of an
olive-coloured or brownish mould, which forms a velvety layer
on almost every kind of dead or decaying vegetable matter.
Unfortunately this mould also attacks living plants, and of late
years has frequently proved a serious pest to vines, appearing
on the leaves, young shoots, and also on the inflorescence. The
mycelium of the fungus lives in the tissues of the host-plant,
and the external mould consists of myriads of upright stems
which are branched above, each branchlet bearing a cluster of
summer-spores at its tip. These spores are produced with great
rapidity, and possess the power of germinating as soon as
mature, consequently the disease spreads rapidly after its first
appearance, unless stringent measures are resorted to, to check
its progress. As already stated, this condition of the fungus
can live and produce fruit on dead as well as on living parts of
plants ; consequently, when all the leaves of the vine or other
plant on which the fungus was parasitic have disappeared, the
summer-spores germinate and grow on dead leaves or any frag-
ments of plants lying about, and by this means keeps itself
going until the young leaves of its host again appear, when they
are promptly attacked. Every gardener must be familiar with
this grey mould as it occurs on the branches of geraniums and
various other plants that have died back, also on dead, dried up
leaves, &c., on the soil of plant pots and on the ground. Under
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 87
certain conditions, not fully known, the myceliwm of this fungus
grows into minute blackish compact lumps ealled sclerotia.
These bodies remain in a resting condition for some time, and
eventually produce fruits resembling in shape a miniature wine-
glass, quarter to half an inch high, and of a dark brown colour.
This form of fruit is produced in the spring, and its spores give
origin to the summer, or Botrytis form of the disease. If the
mould shows itself, the plants should be sprayed at intervals of
ten days with a solution of potassium sulphide, and in casey
where it is known that the disease has previously existed, the
Fic. 4.—Vetvety Movuxp (Sclerotinia Fuckeliana).
(1) Appearance of the summer form of the disease on a portion of a vine leaf; half
natural size. (2) Fruit of summer form; natural size. (3) Fruit of summer form ; highly
magnified. (4) Winter fruit; (A) sclerotium, from which too small stalked cups spring ;
(B) one-quarter natural size. (5) Spores of winter fruit ; highly magnified.
vines should be sprayed, only before the leaf-buds begin to
expand, with a solution of sulphate of iron. As a matter of
course all diseased leaves that have fallen should be collected
and burned; and every trace of the mould, as it appears on
dying parts of plants should be destroyed. It is useless picking
off a diseased leaf or twig, rubbing it to powder between the
fingers, and throwing it down, on the supposition that the
fungus is destroyed ; this is not the case, the very minute spores
are only spread about by this method.
88 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
The present, or a very closely related fungus, does immense
injury to lilies, daffodils, snowdrops, and allied plants, and in
such cases it is not wise to continue cultivating similar plants in
those places where the disease has once appeared, as the sclerotia
of the fungus are formed in the soil, and a repetition of the
disease is almost certain.
Pear Lear Cuuster-Cup. (Gymnosporangiwm Sabine, Wint.)
This fungus grows on two different host-plants at different
periods of its existence. The spring stage grows on various
kinds of juniper, especially Juniperus Sabina, bursting through
the bark in April and May under the form of reddish-brown
gelatinous masses, quarter to half an inch long. These masses
consist of myriads of spores, which germinate without falling
away from the sticky masses on which they are formed, and
produce a crop of still smaller, secondary spores. These
secondary spores are carried in the air by currents, and such as
happen to alight on the damp surface of pear leaves commence
to germinate at once, and soon enter the tissues of the leaf.
About a fortnight after the infection of a leaf, clusters of
minute cylindrical bodies burst through the epidermis of the leaf.
These little bodies are popularly known as cluster-cups; the
outside cover splits into shreds at the tip, and liberates the
minute spores contained in its interior. The spores produced in
the cluster-cups, curiously enough, cannot again directly infect
pear leaves, but must be conveyed by some agent on to the
branch of a juniper, where they germinate, enter the tissues, and
in due course give origin to the gelatinous masses already
described, the spores of which, in turn, cannot infect the kind
of tree on which they are produced, but must find their way on
to the surface of young pear leaves. When pear leaves are
badly attacked they fall early in the season, thus affecting the
existing fruit crop, and also that of the following season, as the
wood is not properly matured, and there is a lack of reserve
material. It is important to remember that the infected pear
leaves will not infect other pear trees, but only juniper trees,
and that when the pear leaves have fallen the pear tree is
perfectly free from disease ; that is to say, the myceliwm of the
fungus does not spread from the leaves into the branches. On
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 89
the other hand, when a juniper is once infected, the mycelium is
perennial in the branch, and produces a crop of fruit each spring
without any further inoculation.
Fic. 5.—Prar Lear Ciuster-Cup (Gymnosporangium Sabine).
(1) The spring form of fruit growing on juniper ; one-quarter natural size. (2) A single
spore of the spring form growing on juniper ; magnified 300 times. (3 and 4) The summer
or cluster-cup form of fruit growing on living pear leaves; half natural size. (5) Two
cluster-cups ; (A) closed, (B) cut open to show the spores in its interior ; slightly magnified.
(6) Spores from a cluster-cup ; magnified 300 times.
As it is absolutely necessary for the existence of this fungus
that it should spend part of its time on a juniper, and part on a
pear tree, it is obvious that if one of its two host-plants is
removed the disease would cease to exist. A single diseased
juniper is quite sufficient to infect all the pear trees growing in
its neighbourhood; therefore, if the disease shows itself, seek
out the juniper, and remove it altogether. If that is not desirable,
the infected branches should be cut away. ‘These are readily
recognised by the gouty swellings caused by the fungus, as well
as by the gelatinous masses of the fungus itself projecting from
cracks in the bark.
Several other rosaceous plants, as hawthorns, apples, &c.,
have their leaves and fruit attacked by cluster-cups, one stage of
which also develops on species of juniper ; hence the suggestions
given above will suffice for the removal of the parasite.
90 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
TrEE Root Rot. (Agaricus melleus, Vahl.)
This fungus belongs to the group commonly known as
‘‘toadstools,”” and grows in dense clusters at the roots of trees
and around stumps. Every part except the gills is dingy yellow
or honey colour; the cap is two to three inches broad, and
the stem four to six inches long, with a torn frill or ring
placed about an inch from the top. The gills are white. This
fungus” grows readily on decaying wood, and in some cases
Fia. 6.—Tree Roor Ror (Agaricus mellews). One quarter natural size.
appears to grow in the soil; but in such cases, if carefully
examined, it will be found to spring from buried wood, roots, &e.
The myceliwm or spawn forms thin, blackish, cord-like strands,
which run a few inches under the soil for a distance of many
yards from the parent plant. If one of these strands happens
to come in contact with a young root-branch of a growing
tree, the myceluvwm soon enters the tissues of the root, where
it spreads rapidly, both in the root and in the soil, attacking
every rootlet with which it comes in contact, until eventually
every portion of the root becomes covered with a white, cottony
DISEASES OF PLANTS. 91
layer of myceliwm. At this stage the general appearance of
the tree clearly shows that something is wrong; the myceliwm
spreads up the trunk between the bark and the wood, and also
forms dense clusters of toadstools round the base of the trunk,
and finally the tree dies. Soon after a tree is attacked, and
the fungus is thoroughly established, strands of myceliwm
radiate in the soil in every direction in search of fresh victims.
It thus frequently happens that when the disease is once
established in an orchard, several trees are attacked in suc-
cession, inoculation taking place by the underground myceliwm
attacking the roots. The spores of the fungus cannot enter an
unbroken surface of the tree, but grow readily on any wounded
surface of the trunk near the base, on broken exposed roots, &c.
The fungus under consideration attacks not only nearly all
kinds of fruit trees, but also forest and ornamental trees,
including conifers. Whenever the fungus appears it should be
destroyed, not by the usual method of kicking it over, and
stamping on it, but by either burying or burning. When clusters
of the toadstool grow round the base of a living trunk, it may
be taken for granted that the roots are more or less attacked.
In such cases the fungus should be cut out, and the wound
protected against further chance of infection by a coating of
tar. The roots should also be examined, and if found to be
more or less covered with white myceliwm, should be freely
dressed with sulphur and again covered. When a iree is
attacked it is advisable to isolate it, by digging a narrow trench
nine inches deep round the trunk at a distance of three yards
away, so as to check the spread of the underground myceliwm,
and prevent its reaching the roots of other trees. The soil
removed in making the trench should be kept within the trench,
and not thrown outside the infected area.
Other kinds of toadstool also grow in dense clusters round
the base of trunks, stumps, decaying posts, &c., but differ from
Agaricus melleus in having dark-coloured gills and spores,
whereas in A. mellews the spores and gills remain white.
It may be mentioned as an observed fact that more than one
valuable tree has been killed by the careless use of the grass-
cutting machine, the base of the trunk or exposed roots having
been wounded, such wounds serving as a starting point for the
germinating spores of this agaric.
92, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS.
By Professor SypNEY H. Vinzs, M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S., &c.
[Read June 15, 1897.]
Or all the remarkable and varied modifications of the members
of the plant-body, perhaps none are more striking or have excited
sreater interest than the now familiar “ pitchers.”” They are
striking owing to the variety and sometimes beauty of form and
colour which they present; they are interesting on account of
the morphological and physiological problems which they suggest.
It is impossible for me to discuss their morphology, that
is their development and general structure, what parts of
the plant enter into their composition, and what resemblances
and differences exist between them in this respect: for were I to
attempt this, it would prevent me from doing justice to the topic
which I have selected as the subject of this lecture, namely,
their function and use. I shall, therefore, only incidentally
allude to this aspect of the matter.
The number of genera in which structures, fairly coming
under the designation of ‘ pitchers”’ occur, is considerable ; and
are as follows, arranged in their Natural Orders as determined
in the ‘‘ Genera Plantarum ” of Bentham and Hooker. Taking
first those which are undoubted “ pitcher-plants,’’ we have :—
(1). Sarraceniacee ; Sarracenia, Darlingtonia, Heliamphora,
(2). Nepenthacee ; Nepenthes.
(3). Asclepiadaceew ; Dischidia (in a few species, of which
only D. rafflesiana has been fully investigated).
(4). Saaxifragacee ; Cephalotus.
To these may be added the Utriculariew with their curious
‘‘bladders,’’ which, in spite of their divergent form, are essentially
** pitchers ”’ :
(5). Lentibulariacee; Utricularia (nearly all species),
Genlisea, Polypompholyx, Biovularia; which are all rootless
plants :—and to render the account of the physiology of these
structures complete, mention must be made of the curious hollow
subterranean scale-leaves of Lathrea Squamaria (Oroban-
chacew); as also of some Liverworts (e.g. Frullania).
Thus, apart from the pitchered Liverworts, we find that pitchers
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 93
occur in eleven genera (including Lathrea) of Phanerogams
belonging to six more or less widely separated dicotyledonous
Natural Orders. With regard to their respective habitats, these
plants are mostly either aquatic and floating (many species of
Utricularia), or such as grow in more or less damp soil; Dis-
chidia, however, is an epiphyte growing on trees, and therefore
in a dry situation; whilst Lathrea grows in woods, being
parasitic on the roots of trees.
I will only say, with regard to the general morphology of the
pitchers, that each pitcher is either an entire specially modified
leaf, or less commonly (e.g. Nepenthes, often in Utricularia) a
specially modified part of a leaf. They vary widely in size, being
often several inches, or even two feet or more long in the Sarra-
ceniacez, whilst in Utricularia they are minute and delicate in
structure. This difference in size and consistence is recognised
in the technical terms which have been applied to these struc-
tures. Thus, Linneus (‘‘Amoen. Acad.,’’ vol. 6, p. 232, 1763;
also, ‘‘ Philosoph. Bot.,’”’ Rose’s Engl. Edn., p. 247, 1775) di
tinguishes the bladders of Utricularia as folliculi, from the
pitchers of Nepenthes and Sarracenia which he terms wtriculs ;
similarly, Willdenow (‘‘ Principles of Botany,’’ Engl. Edn., p. 80,
1811) designates the pitcher by the still accepted term ascidiwm,
and the bladder by the term ampulla.
A point of special interest is the fact that in some genera
(Sarraceniacee, Nepenthes, Cephalotus) the pitchers are closed
during the early stages of their development. The opening is
effected in the Sarraceniacee by asplitting of the tissue in the
middle line of the ventral surface of the pitcher near its apex, so
that a narrow aperture, with a well-developed margin, is formed,
which enlarges with the subsequent growth of the pitcher. In
pitchers with this mode of dehiscence the,apical portion beyond
the aperture is often considerably developed into a_ broad
flattened (as in Sarracenia) or inflated ‘“‘ hood” (as in Darling-
tonia). In Nepenthes and Cephalotus, on the contrary, the
dehiscence of the pitcher closely resembles the circumscissile
dehiscence of such fruits as those of the Pimpernel and the
Henbane, so that a lid or operculum is distinctly marked
off, remaining attached to the rim of the pitcher by a narrow
articulation. In describing these various pitchers the term
‘‘operculate’”’ has been used indiscriminately, whereas it is clear
94 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
that it can only be appropriately applied to those of Nepenthes
and Cephalotus; probably the “hood” of Sarracenia and
Darlingtonia is not homologous with, any more than it is
analogous to, the “lid” of these two genera. When once open,
the pitchers remain so. In fact, in the great majority of cases,
direct access to the interior of the pitcher is offered; the only
exceptions being Utricularia and Polypompholyx, where the
aperture is closed by a valve which opens inwards.
The pitchers are borne in somewhat different positions in
different plants. Thus in Nepenthes and Dischidia, they are
distributed over the length of the stem, and in Utricularia over
the leaves or the shoots; in Sarracenia, Darlingtonia, Heliam-
phora, Cephalotus, Genlisea, they are borne in a cluster at the
surface of the ground, after the manner of radical leaves. In
the latter case, the leaves may all be pitchered, as in Sarracenia,
Darlingtonia, and Heliamphora, though in the latter some of
the leaves tend to develop a flattened blade; or the pitchered
leaves may alternate with ordinary foliage-leaves, as in Cephalo-
tus and Genlisea. In most cases the pitchers are freely exposed
in the medium, be it air or water, in which the plant is living ;
but in the terrestrial Utricularias, and in Genlisea, this is not so.
Goebel (‘‘ Pflanzenbiologische Schilderungen,” ii., 1891, p. 145;
‘Biologie von Genlisea,”’ Flora, 1893) has shown that these Utricu-
larias develope runners or rhizomes which penetrate the substratum
upon which the plant is growing, and thus it comes about that the
bladders borne on these runners are subterranean: and further,
that the long slender pitchers of Genlisea curve downwards to
the soil, penetrating it by means of the two long apical appen-
dages which enter the soil after the manner of awned fruits
such as those of Stipa pennata or Erodium. Similarly
the scaly leaves of Lathrea are subterranean. Thus pitchers
may be either suspended in the air, partially or completely
immersed in water, or buried in the soil, conditions which
must obviously have an important bearing upon their fune-
tions.
The history of pitcher-plants is a long one. Sarracenia,
the first of them to be described, was figured by Clusius (“ Rav.
Plant. Hist.,” lib. iv.) in 1601, under the name Limoniwm
peregrinwm,and was subsequently mentioned in Morison’s “ Plant.
Hist. Oxon.,”’ iii., 1699, as Coilophyllwm virgumanum; it was
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 95
renamed Sarracena by Tournefort (‘““Inst. Rei. Herb.” i., p. 567)
in 1700; and this name, altered to Sarracenia, was adopted by
Linneus in his “Genera Plantarum.’’ Nepenthes was discovered
in Madagascar by Flacourt (‘‘ Descrip. Insul. Madagascar’’), the
governor of that island, about the middle of the seventeenth
century, and was called Anramatiko by him. Shortly after-
wards another form of it was found in Ceylon by Paul Hermann
to which the name Bandura Cingalensiwm was given by Paul
Amman (“ Char. Plant. Nat.,’’ 1685, p. 194); an account of this
plant was also given by Hermann Nicolaus Grimm (‘‘ Ephem.
Acad. Nat. Curios.,’’ ann. I., Dec. 2, 1682). Breyne (“ Prod. Fase.
Rar. Plant.,”’ [.,1680, p. 18) says of the plant:—“‘Bandure ramum,
foliis, folliculis, floribusque condecoratum, ab Exxcellentissimo at-
que Magno illo Botanico Domino Hermanno pulchre siccatum,
et ex Zeilan Insula transmissum, Domini Commelyni Senatoris
Amstelodamensis gratiz debeo,’’ and subsequently, in the second
part of his ‘‘ Prodromus”’ (1689), he proposed the generic name
Nepenthes (describing the Ceylon plant as Nepenthes zeylanicum
flore minore, nobis), a name which was adopted by Linnzus.
Other forms were discovered and variously named at different
times; for instance, one by Rumph (in the Malay Archipelago),
as Cantharifera (Herb. Amboinense,” V., p. 121, 1782), and
another by Loureiro (“ Fl. Cochin.,” IL., p. 744, 1790) as
Phyllamphora mirabilis.
The next of these plants to be described was Utricularia,
which is figured by Rivinus in his Ordo Plantarum que sunt
flore irregulart monopetalo, 1690, under the name Lentibularia,
for which Linneus substituted the name Utricularia. Then,
after a long interval, came Cephalotus and Dischidia, both of
which are associated with Robert Brown. Though Cephalotus
was discovered by Labillardiére (‘““Nov. Holl. Pl.,” ii. 6, t. 145) in
1806, the best accounts of the plant are those given by R. Brown,
first in “ Flinders’ Voyage to Terra Australis,’ 1814 (Works,
Vol. i.), and secondly, in a special paper published in 1882,
(Works, Vol. ii.). Dischidia was discovered by Sir Joseph Banks,
in Australia, on the occasion of his visit in 1770, and was sub-
sequently named and formally described by R. Brown, in a paper
on the Asclepiadee, which was read before the Wernerian
Natural History Society in 1809 (republished in Works, Vol. ii.) ;
but, curiously enough, he gives in this paper no special account
96 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of the pitchers of Dischidia, but reference is made to them in
the paper on Cephalotus already mentioned.
With regard to the history of the remaining genera, Helli-
amphora, discovered by R. Schomburgk in British Guiana, was
described by Bentham (“ Trans. Linn. Soce.’’) in 1841: Darlingtonia,
discovered in California, by Brackenridge in 1842, was named
and described by Torrey (“Smithsonian Contributions,” vi.) in
1854; and Genlisea was discovered in Brazil by St. Hilaire
(“ Ann. d. sci. Nat.” sér. ii., tome ii., 1839).
After this brief historical sketch of the discovery and determi-
nation of the genera, we pass to the consideration of the various
theories which have at different times been propounded as to the
use of the pitchers. Such views were naturally expressed first
with regard to Sarracenia. The fact which seemed especially to
call for explanation was the presence of watery liquid in the
pitchers. Thus Catesby says (‘‘ Nat. Hist. of Carolina,” ii. 1754)
—“The hollows of these leaves always retain some water, and
seem to serve as an asylum or secure retreat for numerous
insects, from frogs and other animals which feed on them.”
1770), regards the pitchers as reservoirs of water for the needs
of the plant, which he considers to resemble the Nympheas:
“Sic metamorphosis folii Nymphee in folium Sarracenize, ut
ipsa aquam pluvialem excipiens et retinens extra aquas crescat :
mira nature providentia!” But unfortunately he gave up this
comparatively rational view for the idea that the object of the
pitchers was to supply thirsty birds with water :—‘‘ Folium S.
purpure in Spec. Plantarum descriptum, aquam prebet sitien-
tibus aviculis ’’ (‘‘Preelect. in Ord. Nat. Plant.,’’ Ed. Giseke, 1792,
p. 316). Possibly Linneus’ earlier and more reasonable conjec-
ture may have been suggested to him by Peter Collinson
on sending him some specimens of Sarracenia, with a letter
(quoted by Smith, “ Correspondence of Linnzus’’), dated from
London, Sept. 17, 1765, in which he says :—‘ As you so justly
wdmire the Sarracenia as one of the wonders of the vegetable
kingdom, that you may havea more perfect idea of the wonderful
reservoirs which retain the water to supply the plant in great
droughts, I send you two leaves.” In a postscript to this letter,
Collinson first draws attention to the presence of insects in the
pitchers. He says :—‘ Many leaves grow round the centre bud of
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 97
the Sarracenia, which make a pretty appearance with their
mouths open to catch the rains and dews; but many poor insects
lose their lives by being drowned in these cisterns of water.” It
should also be mentioned that Bobart (in Morison, “ Plant. Hist.
Oxon.,”’ i., p. 533, 1699) had suggested that the aperture of the
pitcher was opened and closed from time to time by the change in
position of the lid, or rather the hood, working as it were on a
hinge. Of Cotlophyllum virgimanum breviore folio, he says :—
“In suprema folii parte labrum latum subrotundum est...
operculi vicem prestans, cardinis motu donatum, quo os
cavitatis frequenter contegitur ;’’ and of another species (longiore
folio erecto) :—‘ In summo uniuscujusque ad unum latus, labrum
tegumentumve prominens enascitur, quod in his speciebus
operculum est, quod divina providentia ad obtegendam et
defendendam plantam a pluviarum injurus statutum videtur, et
theculam scloppeti aut vasis lignei operimentum haud inepte
refert.” Linneus at one time adopted the view of the
mobility of the lid, for we find him saying, in his “ Hortus Cliffor-
tianus” (1737, p. 497) :—‘‘ Folia harum uti nepenthes folia folli-
culo constant, qui operculo, cardinis motu quasi donato, claudi
potest et aperiri.”’
An important step onwards was made by Sir J. HK. Smith,
early in the present century. In his “ Introduction to Physiological
and Systematic Botany’’ (I quote from the 2nd Edn., 1809, p.
195), after giving Linneus’ view of the use of the pitchers as
reservoirs of water, he goes on to say :—‘‘ But the consideration
of some other species renders this hypothesis very doubtful.
Sarracenia flava and S. adunca are so constructed that rain is
nearly excluded from the hollow of their leaves, and yet that part
contains water which seems to be secreted by the base of each
leaf. What then is the purpose of this unusual contrivance ?”’
He then alludes to the constant presence of dead insects in the
pitchers in these terms :—“ The S. purpurea is usually observed to
be stored with putrefying insects, whose scent is perceptible as we
pass the plant in a garden; for the margin of its leaves is beset
with inverted hairs, which, like the wires of a mouse-trap, render
it very difficult for any unfortunate fly that has fallen into the
watery tube, to crawl out again. Probably the air evolved by
these dead flies may be beneficial to vegetation, and, as far as the
plant is concerned, its curious construction may be designed to
H
98 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
entrap them, while the water is provided to tempt as well as to
retain them.’
Sir J. E. Smith here makes two valuable and original sugges-
tions: (1) that the pitchers are capable of secreting liquid; and
(2) that their use is to entrap insects, which may serve to nourish
the plant. The correctness of the second suggestion was soon
confirmed. Macbride, in a letter addressed to Sir J. K. Smith,
dated April 11, 1815 (‘‘ Trans. Linn. Soe.,” xii., 1815), points out
that in Sarracenia flava and adunca (variolaris, Michaux),
insects are attracted to enter the pitchers by a sugary secretion
produced by glands on the internal surface near the mouth. The
matter was subsequently further investigated by Mellichamp,
whose results are given by the late lamented Asa Gray, in
an article contributed to the ‘‘ New York Tribune,” and repro-
duced in the “ Gardeners’ Chronicle’’ for 1874. Mellichamp
devoted his attention to two questions: (1) Is the liquid in the
pitchers merely rainwater, or is it a secretion? (2) Can the
pitchers digest the insects which they catch? He concluded,
with regard to the first question, that the pitchers can secrete
liquid, because he found a few drops of liquid in unopened
pitchers when there had been no rain for some days; and be-
cause he also found liquid in pitchers to which the admission
of rainwater is next to impossible on account of the overhanging
hood. The second question he answered in the negative, because
he found that small pieces of venison immersed in the liquid in
a pitcher did not undergo more rapid change than similar pieces
kept in water, though in the former case the meat “ became
more offensive to the nostrils ’’ than in the latter. Asa Gray
adds :—‘ The only inference to draw is that the liquid hastens
decomposition, for it seems to me that decomposition, not
digestion, is what it comes to.’’ Mellichamp himself speaks of
the flies, &c., becoming “liquid manure.” In the same year
(1874), in his Presidential Address to the Section of Zoology and
Botany of the British Association (Belfast), Sir J. D. Hooker
treated of this subject, and says :—‘‘ It is known that Sarracenia
flava secretes fluid, but under what precise conditions I am not
aware’’; and of S. variolaris :—‘ That it secretes a fluid noxious
to insects there is no doubt, though in the specimens examined
I found none.” He concludes :—* The fact that insects normally
become decomposed in the fluid of all, would suggest the pro-
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 99
bability that they all feed on the products of decomposition ; but
as yet we are absolutely ignorant whether the glands within the
pitchers are secretive or absorptive, or both; if secretive,
whether they excrete water or a solvent; and if ab-
sorptive, whether they absorb animal matter or the pro-
ducts of decomposition.”” Some years later, Schimper (‘ Bot.
Zeitung,’ 1882) made some observations like those of
Mellichamp and with the same results, and adduces evidence
to show that the products of decomposition are, as a matter of
fact, absorbed by the pitchers. Finally, Goebel has recently come
to the same conclusion (“ Pflanzenbiologische Schilderungen,”’
ii. 1891, p. 166), partly on account of experiments with S. illus-
trata (a hybrid between S. flava and S. purpurea), and partly on
anatomical grounds.
If any further evidence is needed to prove that the pitchers
of Sarracenia are organs for the capture of insects, it is
afforded by the anatomical features presented by their internal
surface. Generally speaking, this surface presents the following
varieties of structure:—The ‘‘hood’’ bears a few scattered
downwardly directed hairs, and, especially towards its lower part,
a number of glands which secrete honey. Next to this is a
smooth slippery surface, which extends for a short distance
below the orifice of the pitcher; this is followed by a much
longer region bearing stiff hairs pointing downwards, amongst
which are some glands ; and towards the bottom of the pitcher
the hairs cease and the surface is smooth. This arrangement
produces an admirable insect-trap. Insects are attracted to the
mouth of the pitcher by the honey secreted about it; they slip
on the smooth surface upon which the honey-glands border and
fall down in among the hairs below, which offer an almost in-
superable obstacle to their climbing out again.
To summarise what has been said as to the function of the
pitchers of Sarracenia, it is evident that they are undoubtedly
organs for the capture of insects, and it is equally clear that the
captured insects contribute to the nutrition of the plant. It is
also most probable that the insects undergo decomposition and
not digestion ; for there do not appear to be any glands in the
pitchers to secrete a digestive enzyme; and, moreover, many
observers have noticed the presence of living maggots in the
pitchers which would be impossible were a digestive liquid
H 2
100 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
present. But there remains one point which requires further
investigation, and that is as to how the pitchers come to contain
liquid. Whilst it is true that in those pitchers in which the orifice
is not protected by the hood, the liquid which they contain may
be rainwater, the observations of Mellichamp suggest the pro-
bability of a secretion of liquid by the pitcher.
The pitchers of Darlingtonia and Heliamphora so closely re-
semble those of Sarracenia in structure, that there can be no
doubt that their function is essentially the same in all these genera.
It will not, therefore, be necessary to enter upon a separate con-
sideration of these two genera.
We pass now to the consideration of the pitchers of
Nepenthes. The early observers duly noted the frequent
presence of liquid in the pitchers, and they do not seem to have
doubted that the liquid was secreted by the pitchers; the preva-
lence of this conviction is evidenced by the fact that the first
specific name given to the genus by Linneus was Nepenthes
distillatoria. The idea was equally prevalent that the liquid was
provided to assuage the thirst of man, and possibly of other
animals also. Thus Linneus, in his ‘‘ Flora zeylanica ” (1747),
quoting from Grimm, speaks of the pitcher as ‘ Digitis presso
dissiliente aquam dulcem, limpidam, amabilem, confortantem,
frigidam suppeditantia ad necessarium hominis usum, ita
ut interdum sex vel octo receptacula tantum aque continent
quantum unius hominis sitim cum maxima delectatione bene
extinguere possit.’””’ So much, apparently, had this view im-
pressed Breyne, that he named the plant after the Nepenthes
of the Greeks, the assuager of sorrow; and Linneus, in
establishing Breyne’s name, gave way to the following outburst
of enthusiasm (‘‘ Hort. Cliffort.,” p. 431, 1737) :—“ Assumsi
synonymon Breynii, cum enim si hee non Helene nepenthes,
certe Botanicis omnibus erit. Quis Botanicorum longissimo
itinere profectus, si mirabilem hance plantam reperiret, non |
admiratione raperetur, totus attonitus, preteritorum malo-
rum oblitus, mirificam Creatoris manum dum _ obstupescens
adspiceret ?”’
Here the matter was allowed to rest for a considerable time,
little attention being paid to it until well on in the present
century, when some notes on the liquid contents of the pitchers
of two species were given in the “ Botanical Magazine,” with
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 101
the descriptions and figures of the plants. In Vol. 58, 1826,
No. 2,629, N. phyllamphora is described, with the following re-
marks :—** According to some authors the water rises from the
roots, and is secreted into the vessels before the lid of the pitcher
has ever been opened ; and Rumphius observes that, in this state,
these curiously constructed vessels contain the most water, the
quantity of which diminishes after the lid opens, though even
then it fills again in the course of the night and evaporates in
the day; but after the lid is quite shrivelled the water entirely
disappears. Loureiro, however, has a different opinion, and
attributes the presence of the liquid to the reception and preser-
vation of the night dews by the spontaneous opening and shut-
ting of the lid. What is the real fact does not seem to have
been as yet positively ascertained. In our plant, cultivated in
the stove, the young pitchers, before the lid opened, were,
Messrs. Loddiges observe, about one-third filled with a
sourish tasted water; but after the lids opened, the water en-
tirely evaporated.’ Again, in Vol. 55, 1828, No. 2,798, in the
description of N. distillatoria, the matter is referred to :—‘‘ Before
opening the lid, rather more than a drachm of limpid fluid was
formed within each of the largest pitchers of our specimen. This
had a sub-acid taste, which increased after the rising of the lid,
when the fluid slowly evaporated. My friend, Dr. Turner, per-
ceived it to emit, while boiling, an odour like baked apples, from
containing a trace of vegetable matter, and he found it to yield
minute crystals of superoxalate of potash on being evaporated to
dryness.”
Some years later an analysis of the liquid was made by
Voelker (Ann. Mag. of Nat. Hist., ser. ii., vol. 4, 1849), who
found that it gave a dry residue of about 0°9 per cent., consisting
of chloride of potassium, carbonate of soda, and lime and
magnesia in combination with malic and citric acids, together
with a trace of organic matter ; but this analysis does not appear
to throw any light upon the physiological importance of the
liquid. Nor do any investigations in this direction seem to have
been made until the whole question of ‘carnivorous ”’ plants
had been raised by Darwin, when Sir Joseph Hooker made some
experiments on the digestive power of the liquid in these pitchers.
He found distinct evidence of digestive action on cubes of boiled
egg, raw meat, blood-fibrin, and cartilage (Address, Brit. Asso-
102 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
ciation, 1874), though he somewhat qualifies his conclusion by
the statement ‘‘That this process, which is comparable to
digestion, is not wholly due to the fluid first secreted by the
glands, appears to me most probable ; for I find that very little
action takes place in any of the substances placed in the fluid
drawn from the pitchers and put in glass tubes.” Within a
short space of time a number of researches were made which
seemed to place the digestive capacity of Nepenthes beyond
doubt. Dr. Lawson Tait stated in “ Nature ’’ for 1875, that he
had succeeded in obtaining a substance resembling pepsin from
the liquid collected from the pitchers of various species of
Nepenthes. In 1876, a Paper was published (‘‘ Ber. deut. chem.
Ges.’’) by von Gorup-Besanez, in which he states that shreds of
blood-fibrin placed in the acid liquid (from N. phyllamphora and
gracilis) at a temperature of 40° C., were more or less completely
dissolved within an hour, and that the resulting liquid gave the
characteristic ‘‘ biuret-reaction’’’ indicative of the presence of
peptones. In the following year I published a Paper on the
subject in the “Journal of the Linnean Society’’ (Vol. xv.,
1877), in which I showed that it is possible to prepare a glycerin-
extract of the pitchers, which, on the addition of acid, has a
well-marked digestive action on proteids.
Moreover, the structure of the internal surface of the pitcher,
contrasting, as it does, strongly with that of Sarracenia, is such
as to suggest a digestive function. In Nepenthes, speaking
generally, honey-glands are borne on the under surface of the
lid, or about the orifice of the pitcher; for a considerable,
though varying, distance from the orifice, the surface is smooth
and slippery; and the remainder of the surface is provided with
glands which pour out the secretion: there is no region bearing
detentive hairs as in Sarracenia. Clearly the object in view is to
cause the insects to fall into the liquid filling the base of the
pitcher ; and the fact that the liquid is undoubtedly secreted
points to the conclusion that its object is not merely to drown
the insects, but to digest them as well.
Nevertheless, the digestive capacity of Nepenthes has been
‘disputed of late years. Thus Dubois (‘ Comptes Rendus,’’ exi.,
1890) concludes that ‘the liquid contains no digestive juice
comparable to pepsin, and that Nepenthes is not a carnivorous
plant ’’; and further “that the phenomena of disintegration or
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 1038
false digestion observed by M. Hooker were, without doubt, due
to the activity of micro-organisms introduced from without
rather than to the secretion of the plant.” Another writer in
the same strain is Tischutkin (“‘ Ber. d. deutsch. bot. Ges.,”’ 1889 ;
“ Bot. Centralblatt,’’ 50, 1892), who asserts that the solution of
proteids in the liquid of insectivorous plants (incl. Nepenthes) is
due to the activity of micro-organisms which are introduced,
like the insects, from outside, and that these plants do not digest
the insects, but only absorb the products of their putrefaction.
Had these two writers made themselves acquainted with all
the previously ascertained facts, they would not, I venture to
think, have thought it worth while to express these views. In
order to fully reassure myself on the subject, I have made,
during the last two years, a number of experiments with
Nepenthes (chiefly N. Mastersiana), with special reference to the
statements of Dubois and Tischutkin. I propose to publish a
detailed paper on the subject before long, so I will now content
myself with a brief summary of the chief results which I have
obtained * :—
(1) I have confirmed my previous observation that a glycerin
extract of the pitchers can be prepared (after thorough washing,
and lying for 24 hours in absolute alcohol), which readily digests
blood-fibrin, at a temperature of 35°-40° C., in presence of
dilute HCl.
(2) I have repeatedly found that the liquid taken from an
unopened pitcher digests blood-fibrin, under the above conditions,
with great rapidity (1-2 hours).
(3) Liquid from open pitchers digests blood-fibrin very
rapidly under the above conditions, the digestive action being
much more rapid than any putrefactive change attributable to
micro-organisms ; further, the digestion goes on, though less
rapidly, in the presence of antiseptics (e.g. thymol, chloroform,
potassium cyanide).
(4) The liquid obtained from the pitchers, if filtered, may
be kept in a bottle for a considerable time (months) without
undergoing putrefaction, and it still retains its digestive power.
These results will, I trust, suffice to prove that the pitcher
* T am very much indebted to Messrs. Veitch for supplies of liquid
from the pitchers, as also for valuable specimens of Nepenthes and other
pitcher-plants.
104 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of Nepenthes does actually produce a digestive enzyme, and
that there is no ground for attributing the digestion of proteids
which undoubtedly occurs in the pitchers, to the action of
micro-organisms.
In concluding the consideration of Nepenthes, I must briefly
allude to the mechanism of the secretion. In many cases, as is
well known, the secretion of liquid by leaves is dependent upon
the root-pressure, ceasing directly the leaf is detached from the
plant. As Wunschmann first definitely proved (‘‘ Die Gattung
Nepenthes,” 1872), this is not the case in Nepenthes; the
pitchers continue to secrete for some days after they have been
detached, provided that the cut ends of their stalks are placed
in water. In this respect the pitchers of Nepenthes resemble
nectaries.
On account of the similarity of its pitchers to those of
Sarracenia and Nepenthes, Cephalotus may be conveniently con-
sidered next. Unfortunately our knowledge in this case is far
less complete than in the two preceding cases. In his paper
on the Botany of Terra Australis, Robert Brown states that
“the ascidia or pitchers of Cephalotus were observed to be in
general nearly half filled with a watery fluid, in which great
numbers of a small species of ant were frequently found
drowned. This fluid, which had a slightly sweet taste, may
possibly be in part a secretion of the pitcher itself, but more
probably consists merely of rainwater received and preserved
in it.”’ However, there is now no doubt that the liquid is, at
any rate for the most part, really secreted ; for, as Goebel points
out (“ Pflanzenbiologische Schilderungen,” IT., p. 111), unopened
pitchers contain liquid. As regards the structure of the internal
surface of the pitcher, the under surface of the lid is smooth
and slippery, as is also the inner surface of the thickened
margin (or ‘“collar’’) of the orifice; the surface of the middle
portion of the pitcher bears numerous glands, which do not,
however, appear to be digestive glands; and within this region
there are two lateral projecting areas which not only bear
glands, but numerous water-pores in addition; the lower part
of the pitcher has no glands. What the glands secrete is not
clearly ascertained, though it may be honey; probably the
liquid in the pitcher is secreted through the water-pores. In
view of these peculiarities of structure of the pitcher, there can
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 105
be no doubt that it is an apparatus for catching insects, re-
sembling that of Nepenthes rather than that of Sarracenia.
With regard to the properties of the secreted liquid, the
only evidence that it has any digestive power is a statement by
Lawson Tait, made at the Glasgow meeting of the British
Association, 1877 (quoted by Dickson in his paper on the
Structure of the Pitcher of Cephalotus, ‘‘ Journ. Bot.,” vol. 27,
new series, 1878), that the results of experiments performed
by him with fluid taken from unopened pitchers, were such as
to show that it exerted a digestive action upon animal sub-
tances similar to that exhibited by fluid from Nepenthes pitchers.
Goebel, on the contrary, as the result of his own observations,
takes the opposite view. He remarks, however, that the liquid
seems to exert a distinct antiseptic action ; so that whilst it is
probable that the disintegration of the captured insects is
effected by micro-organisms, it is a process, not of putrefaction
as in Sarracenia, but of digestion, a conclusion which seems
rather paradoxical.
The pitchers which we have considered so far are all such
as may capture flying insects ; though Cephalotus, owing to the
fact that its pitchers are on the ground, captures more especi-
ally crawling insects. We come now to the consideration of
those pitchers which do not capture flying insects, but only
such small animals as either swim or crawl; this section in-
cludes Utricularia (with its immediate allies Polypompholyx
and Biovularia) and Genlisea. The aquatic forms of Utricularia
capture swimming insects, crustacea, &c.; and the land-forms,
as also Genlisea, capture insects, &c., in the soil by means of
their subterranean pitchers.
In speaking thus of Utricularia, I have anticipated some-
what; for I have adduced-no evidence to show that the “ blad-
ders’’ of these plants really are insect-traps. It used to be
thought that the pitchers of the aquatic forms served as floats
to bring the plant to the surface at the time of flowering.
Thus De Candolle (“ Physiol. Véget.,”’ II., 1832) says :—‘‘ When
the plant is young, the bladders are filled with mucus which is
heavier than water; hence the plant is kept at the bottom by
this weight. When flowering approaches, the root secretes air
which enters the bladders and expels the mucus, raising the
valve of the bladder; then the plant, provided with a crowd of
106 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
air-bladders, slowly rises, and comes to float at the surface.
Flowering takes place in the air; when it is over, the root
recommences to secrete mucus which replaces the air in the
bladders, so that the plant becomes heavier and sinks to the
bottom, where it ripens its seed at the spot where they are to be
sown.”
Such a view is obviously incorrect for various reasons. In
the first place it does not take into account the occurrence of
bladders on the land-forms of Utricularia. Moreover the blad-
ders of floating plants are by no means always filled with air ;
and Darwin has shown (‘“ Insectivorous Plants,” 1875, p. 404),
that plants from which the bladders have been removed still
continue to float. On the other hand, the observations of
Darwin (loc. cit.), Cohn (‘ Beitr. zur Biol. d. Pflanzen,” L,
1875), and others (see Goebel, “ Pflanzenbiologische Schilder-
ungen,’’ II.), establish beyond doubt that these bladders are
traps ; when the animals have once entered, escape is rendered
impossible by the closing of the valve guarding the orifice.
Since the plant produces such an elaborate mechanism for
the capture of animals, the inference is obvious that some benefit
must be gained thereby for the plant ; the observations of Biisgen
(‘‘ Ber. deut. bot. Ges.,”” 1888) prove, in fact, that plants thus
supplied with animal food grow more vigorously than similar
plants without it. The captured animals undergo disintegra-
tion in the bladders, and the organic products of the disintegra-
tion are absorbed by the plant, the process of absorption being
effected by the quadrifid or bifid hairs which are scattered over
the internal surface of the bladder. But it has not been ascer-
tained whether the disintegration of the captured animals is
effected by an enzyme secreted by the bladder, or is the result
of putrefaction induced by Bacteria.
The pitchers of Genlisea, though they are adapted to catch
subterranean animals, are altogether different in their form and
mechanism from the bladders of Utricularia with which genus
Genlisea is closely allied. The pitcher has somewhat the
shape of a thermometer: the narrow orifice is continued, as it
were, at each side into a canal formed by the long spirally
wound appendages to which attention has been already drawn,
and which penetrate into the soil. The orifice opens into a
long narrow tubular neck the inner surface is covered by stiff
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS, 107
downwardly directed hairs arranged in a succession of rings,
amongst which a number of stalked two-celled glands are
scattered. The neck opens below into a small cavity, the inter-
nal surface of which is destitute of hairs, but which bears a
number of scattered two-celled glands, as well as two rows of
four-celled glands situated in two rows, one on each side, each
corresponding with the longitudinal course of a vascular bundle
with which the glands are in close relation. The arrangements
here somewhat recall those in Sarracenia. The glands in the
neck pour out a secretion which attracts minute animals to
enter, and to creep further and further along it, the chevaux
de frise of hairs preventing any return, until at length they
reach the dilated glandular chamber at the extremity of the
neck. What takes place there is not known; but whether the
insects are digested or decomposed, the organic products are
absorbed by the plant. Our knowledge of these pitchers is due
to Darwin (“ Insectivorous Plants’’) and to Goebel (‘ Pflanzenbio-
logische Schilderungen,’’ II., 1891, p. 121; also ‘‘ Biologie von
Genlisea,’’ Flora, 1893).
We come now to Lathreza, the last of our series of plants
having subterranean pitchers. Attention was first directed
to the peculiar cavities in the subterranean scale-leaves of
this plant by J. E. Bowman (‘‘ Trans. Linn. Soce.,’’ xvi., 1829).
He detected the numerous glands which are borne on
the surface of the labyrinthine cavity; and he suggested
that, inasmuch as the scales have no stomata, these cavities
might serve a respiratory function, opening as they do by
an orifice just below the insertion of each scale. Shortly
afterwards Meyen (‘‘ Phytotomie,’’ 1830) distinguished the
two kinds of glands—the sessile multicellular glands, the
shortly stalked two-celled glands—and regarded the whole as
an apparatus for the excretion of carbonate of lime. Various
observers published observations on these structures during suc-
ceeding years without, however, making any striking sugges-
tions as to their function, until Cohn, in 1877 (“ Jahresb. d. Schl.
Ges. fiir vaterl. Kultur’) suggested that they might be traps to
catch animals; but as he failed to find animal remains as a
rule in the cavities, he relinquished this view in favour of
another, that, namely, the glands secrete a liquid which renders
it possible for the plant to absorb certain humus-constituents
108 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of the soil, so that the plant would be at once a parasite and a
saprophyte. Krause, in 1879, minutely investigated the histo-
logy of the scale-leaves, and expressed an opinion in favour of
Meyen’s conception of their function; whilst Gilburt, in 1880
(Journ. Roy. Microscop. Soc.’’), suggested that the liquid secreted
by the glands is acid; and further, that the glands not only
secrete but absorb. Some years later a remarkable theory was
propounded by Kerner and Wettstein (“‘ Sitzber. d. k. Akad. d.
Wiss. zu Wien,” xciii., 1886; also Kerner, “ Nat. Hist. of
Plants,” Vol. I, p. 136, 1894), to the effect that the cells
of both kinds of glands do not secrete at all, but possess
the power of extruding protoplasmic filaments through their
walls, which catch animals and suck them dry. This, if
true, would constitute an altogether new form of mechanism,
among the higher plants, for the capture of animals; and
Lathrea would be both parasitic and carnivorous. The point
has since been re-investigated by Scherffel (“ Mitth. aus
dem Bot. Inst. zu Graz,” II., 1888) with altogether different
results. Scherffel finds, indeed, delicate filaments radiating
from these gland-cells ; but not from these only, for they were
to be found at times on any of the cells lining the cavity; and
not only so, but also on foreign bodies lying in the cavity. As
the result of his observations, he comes to the conclusion that
it is impossible for the gland-cells to protrude protoplasmic
filaments ; that the filaments observed are really nothing more
than sessile filamentous Bacteria: and that these cavities
cannot be regarded, from any point of view, as organs for the
capture of insects. Quite recently it has been urged by
Haberlandt (“ Jahrb. f. wiss. Bot.,’’ 1897), Goebel (“Flora ’’ 1897),
and Groom (“ Annals of Botany,’’ 1897), that the real function
of these pitchers is to serve as organs for the excretion of water
by the plant, correlated with the absence of stomata by means
of which transpiration could be effected ; a view for which there
is much to be said.
Dischidia is the last of the plants which claim our considera-
tion. The pitchers of this genus differ in many important
respects from those of the other genera with which these are
obviously comparable, viz., Sarracenia, Nepenthes, Cephalotus.
In Dischidia (D. Rafflesiana) the pitcher has neither hood nor
operculum ; and, as Treub points out (‘‘ Ann. du Jard. Bot. de
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 109
Buitenzorg,” III., 1882), whereas in most pitchers the internal
surface corresponds to the superior or ventral surface of the leaf,
in Dischidia (as also in Lathreza), the internal surface cor-
responds to the inferior or dorsal surface of the leaf. Moreover
the pitcher presents none of those peculiarities of structure in
its interior which make the pitchers of these other genera such
efficient insect-traps; here are no glands, either digestive or
secreting honey, nor any hairs to prevent the exit of animals
which may have found their way into the pitchers; on the
contrary, the internal surface of the pitcher is quite smooth,
consisting of an epidermal layer of cells with highly cuticularised
walls, among which are numerous stomata.
As to the contents of the pitchers, although Griffith says
(Trans. Linn. Soce.,’’ xx., 1851), ‘‘they appear at no period to
contain fluids,” they have generally been found to contain water,
as also small quantities of earth, fragments of leaves, &c., forming
a rich soil. However, the contents of a pitcher will naturally
depend upon its position ; and as the pitchers of Dischidia take
up all possible positions, so that the orifice may be directed
upwards, or downwards, or horizontally, the foregoing statement
obviously applies more particularly to pitchers hanging with the
orifice upwards. But the most striking feature in the economy
of this plant is the fact that each pitcher contains an adven-
titious root which springs generally from the stalk of the pitcher
itself.
Now as to the function of these pitchers. On this point
Wallich (“ Pl. Asiat. Rar.,” vol. 2, p. 142, 1831) says :—“I am
unable to offer any conjecture as to the immediate use of these
curious reservoirs, unless it be to protect the tender roots which
are always found in them in great luxuriance; for after con-
tinuing a certain time, the bags acquire a yellowish hue and
gradually decay, leaving the roots to attach themselves to the
trunk of the tree on which the plant grows. . . . The bags contain
generally a great number of small and harmless black ants,
most of which find a watery grave in the turbid fluid which
frequently half fills the cavity, and which seems to be entirely
derived from without.” Unger, on the other hand, considers
that the liquid is secreted by the plant itself (“ Anat. und
Physiol.,” 1855, pp. 214, 358); and Delpino suggests (‘‘ Nuovo
Giorn. Bot. Ital.,” iii., 1871 ; “‘ Malpighia,”’ iv., 1890) that these
110 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
pitchers, like those of Sarracenia, are traps for catching insects
which, on decomposition, afford nutriment to the plant. There
is, however, no sufficient ground for regarding the pitchers
either as secretory organs or as insect-traps; on the contrary,
the structure of the internal surface conclusively proves that
the pitcher can neither secrete nor absorb, and that it is ill-
adapted for the capture of insects. Treub points out (“ Ann. du
Jard. Bot. de Buitenzorg,”’ III., 1882) that the liquid is cer-
tainly not secreted by the plant, but is merely rainwater, and
concludes that the main object of the pitchers is to economise
water in view of the dry habitat of these plants. The pendent
pitchers, with the orifice upward, serve to collect rainwater,
which can be absorbed by the roots entering each pitcher; the
inverted pitchers cannot collect rainwater, but serve to condense
the watery vapour given off by transpiration through the
numerous stomata on their internal surface, and thus they
render it available for re-absorption by the roots; the oblique
or horizontal pitchers discharge one or both of these functions in
varying degree according to their position. The detritus which
collects in the pendent pitchers—apparently often carried thither
by ants—no doubt affords nutritive material which is absorbed
by the roots. These views have been confirmed by the recent
observations of Groom and of Scott and Sargant (‘‘ Annals of
Botany,” vi., 1893). Hence these pitchers differ essentially in
function from all those which we have considered, in that they
are primarily organs for maintaining the water-supply of the
plant.
In conclusion we may briefly review the main facts which
have been ascertained. We find, in the first place, that the
great majority of these pitchers are “insect-traps”’ (Sarrace-
niacee, Nepenthes, Cephalotus, Utricularia, Genlisea); whilst
the others (Lathraa, Dischidia) have, apparently, no relation to
the capture of animals. Of the ‘insect-traps,” the majority
appear to be incapable of digesting the animals which they
capture (Sarraceniacex, Utricularia, Genlisea), absorbing merely
the products of decomposition effected by micro-organisms; so
that these plants are not really ‘‘ carnivorous,” but only sapro-
phytic : on the other hand, the pitcher of Nepenthes, and perhaps
that of Cephalotus, undoubtedly secretes a digestive enzyme, so
that the former genus, at any rate, is truly ‘“‘ carnivorous.’’ Those
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PITCHER-PLANTS. 111
pitchers which are not “ insect-traps’’ are both related to the
water-supply of the plant; in Lathrea, the main use of the
pitcher seems to be to relieve the plant of the excess of
water which it may have absorbed; whilst in Dischidia, on the
contrary, the main use of the pitcher is to husband to the utmost
the water-resources of the plant.
It is remarkable that the pitcher form should have been as-
sumed by the leaves of so many different plants, some of which
are systematically far removed from each other, and that the
objects in view should beso widely different. Such considerations
naturally suggest the difficult question as to the origin and evolu-
tion of the pitchered leaf in the vegetable kingdom; a question
to which, I will frankly admit, I cannot promise you a satisfactory
answer. Beccari (‘‘ Malesia,” vol. i., p. 236, 1878 ; vol. ii., p. 252,
1886) has urged, whilst especially discussing Dischidia, that
pitchers are gall-formations, caused by the irritation set up by
insects, which have become hereditary because the plant has
found them useful for its own purpose; but this theory has not
met with general acceptance. For my own part, I would ven-
ture to suggest that the origin of pitchers is to be traced back,
not to the action of some extraneous cause, but rather to some
special adaptation to meet the primary physiological needs of
plants growing under certain special conditions. ‘To take first
the typical pitcher-bearing plants, such as the Sarraceniacee,
Nepenthes, and Cephalotus: it is by no means probable that the
pitchers of these plants were developed at once into insect-traps
such as we know them to be; for this end has been even more
successfully attained in quite other ways by such plants as
Drosera, Dioneza, &e. On the contrary, it is probable that these
pitchers had originally a different and a more primitive function.
All these genera grow in damp situations: hence it is not an
impossible conjecture that their pitchers may have been primarily
developed as organs for the excretion of excessive water, like
the pitchered scale-leaves of Lathrea; but with this difference,
that whereas in Lathrea the water is poured out into the soil,
in these genera it was retained in the pitchers for subsequent
re-absorption, when necessary, a special provision of im-
portance in view of the fact that these plants are capable of
active transpiration under appropriate external conditions.
Insects, as a matter of course, came to be drowned in these
112 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOOIETY.
primitive pitchers, and the products of their decomposition began
to be absorbed by the plant ; thus the ‘‘ insectivorous ” habit, with
its attendant modifications of structure and function, would be
gradually established. With Utricularia and Genlisea the case
is different. These are rootless plants, and consequently the
absorptive functions of the root have been delegated to the leaves,
or at least to some of them. It is not difficult to imagine how
that in the land-forms of Utricularia, as in Genlisea, these
vicarious “roots,’’ being subterranean and absorbing water and
substances dissolved in it, may have incidentally acquired the
habit of catching animals; and, with regard to the water-forms
of Utricularia, they have probably inherited this habit, with its
accompanying peculiarities of structure, from ancestral terrestrial
forms. Finally, I would regard the pitchers of Lathrea and of
Dischidia as still primitive, meeting, as they do, primary
physiological needs of the plant in}connection with its water-
supply, and not having undergone specialisation to meet
the acquired need of organic nutriment obtained from captured
animals.
But, as I said before, I have no intention of offering you any-
thing like a cut-and-dried solution of the ultimate and most in-
teresting problem to which the consideration of Pitcher-plants
has naturally led us, so I will refrain from any further discussion
of the suggestion which I have made. You will have gathered
from what 1 have said that our knowledge of the physiology of
Pitcher-plants is still far from complete ; much yet remains to be
done in the way of accumulating missing facts. But even when
all the facts of their physiology have been accumulated, our
knowledge will not be complete until we know, not only what
they do, but also how they have come to be what they are.
STORING AND PRESERVING OF FRUIT.
By Mr. Joseru Cuan, F.R.H.S.
[Read June 29, 1897.]
Next in importance to the growing of fruit is the preserving or
storing it in order to prolong the period of use to the greatest
possible extent. It is grievous to note in a year of plenty the
vast quantities of fruit completely wasted for want of some simple
STORING AND PRESERVING OF FRUIT. 1138
means of preserving it. Iam here speaking entirely of amateurs ;
large market growers are fully alive to the importance of presery-
ing that fruit in the most profitable ways that cannot be sent to
market fresh. The object of this paper, therefore, is to endeavour
to assist those who grow fruit for their own consumption as to
the best means of preserving and utilising it. Much of what is
said will doubtless be well known to many, but some of the
suggestions may be fresh and helpful to others.
SMALL FRuItTs.
Currants, Gooseberries, Strawberries, Raspberries, and
Cherries.
There is no means of greatly prolonging the keeping period
in a fresh condition of these soft fruits, but as large quantities of
them are required for cooking purposes throughout the year, they
may be preserved by simply making into jam. This is such an
old and well-understood process that I need scarcely touch upon
it here. Probably nearly every housewife has a particular way
of her own. One or two points, however, may be noted. It is
most important to be careful in gathering the fruit so as to have
only one variety and one quality to deal with at a time, except
where two kinds of fruit are mixed together to improve the flavour,
such as strawberries and red currants, raspberries and red
currants, or strawberries and gooseberries. The briskness and
acidity of the one helps the sweetness of the other.
Whole-fruit jam such as strawberries, raspberries, &c., is
much more prized now than formerly. This is done by reducing
the sugar to syrup first and pouring in the fruit while boiling. a
little butter being added to keep the mass from rising and boiling
over. Much small fruit is also made into jellies.
One of the most useful methods, however, of retaining in a
more natural condition for use and without sugar is that of
bottling. Thisisa most easy and simple process, far more so
than was formerly the case, owing to a recent invention of bottles
for the purpose, with ingenious contrivances for air-tight
stopping.* Whatever kind of bottles you adopt they can be
placed together in a shallow boiler or any vessel as deep as the
height of the bottles, a little hay being placed between and under-
* See Advertisements, page 27.
I
114 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
neath them. The fruit, after being carefully picked and strigged,
is then poured into the bottles until each is quite full. The
boiler is then filled with water to the necks of the bottles and
heated until the fruit shows signs of cracking, no water having
been put into the bottles up to this period; or the bottles filled
with fruit may be placed in a moderate oven and heated to the
same point, without using water at all. The bottles are at this
stage filled with bozling water and immediately covered whilst
boiling with air-tight stoppers. This is most important, as all
fungoid germs must ve destroyed to prevent fermentation. The
old system of covering with skin was not only tedious but often
failed to thoroughly exclude the air, with the result that mould
soon made its appearance and further keeping was at an end.
But with Messrs. De Luca, Hill & Co.’s bottles there is no danger
of this. Corks are also sometimes used, but these require cover-
ing with resin or tin-foil, which to an amateur takes consider-
able time. In wholesale factories corks are still used, but in
this case bottles are sold with the fruit, and this can be done at
STORING AND PRESERVING OF FRUIT. 115
a much cheaper rate with corks than with other patent stoppers.
But with amateurs stoppered bottles can be used repeatedly
and with care will last for many years. Gooseberries are
generally bottled green, but black and red currants, raspberries
and cherries when ripe.
Plums.
This is one of the most valuable crops for home consumption,
and it is not possible greatly to extend the time for use in an
entirely natural state, as the fruit is very tender and soon
decays. This may, however, be done to a certain extent by cold
storage where the establishment is large enough; and it is a
most valuable help to gardeners in preserving not only plums
but other choice fruit also, such as peaches, nectarines,
apricots, figs, cherries, strawberries, melons, &c. Several
experiments were carried out a few years since by the R.H.S.
in this direction. It was then found that by placing the fruit
in a temperature below freezing point the flavour and character
of the fruit was too much altered, as it ruptured the cellular
tissues, with the result that when thawed it almost immediately
fell to pulp and decayed. But by keeping the temperature to
within a few degrees of freezing-point much choice fruit could
be kept in good palatable condition for periods of several weeks.
This system is now very largely adopted by many of the ship-
ping companies who convey fruit considerable distances in good
condition in a low temperature, and the same system is adopted
on the American railways to convey fruit long distances by land.
I have seen cases of peaches brought by Messrs. Donald
Currie & Co.’s steamers from the Cape to London containing
from ten to twelve dozen fruits which did not contain half a
dozen damaged fruits. In large establishments where quantities
of fruit are grown, and when it is often difficult to keep fruit for
‘special occasions, what an immense assistance it would be to
the gardener to have a chamber of this kind in which to store
surplus fruit until a time particularly required or to prolong the
period of using an extra heavy crop. Any fruit intended to be
stored in this way should be gathered before it is quite ripe.
The usual means of preserving plums are by jam and bottling,
and a most useful dish they are when bottled as above described.
For this purpose, however, they must be gathered before they
12
116 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
are quite ripe, otherwise the skin of many of the fruits is apt to
crack in the heating process. Plums may also be preserved by
bottling or canning in syrup. This is done by boiling together
at the rate of three pounds of sugar to one quart of water and
the white of one egg: pour the fruit whole into the syrup whilst
boiling and continue to boil together for only a few minutes, then
pour into bottles or cans and stopper or seal air-tight immediately
whilst boiling. Or the fruit may be placed in the bottles or cans,
the bottles heated and the syrup poured in just the same as in
bottling with water and stoppered whilst boiling hot. Any of the
small fruits may also be preserved in this way, as well as peaches,
nectarines, and pears.
We now come to a less known method of preserving plums,
that of evaporation. Although sun-drying and evaporation have
been practised for years in France and America, it has not yet
gone beyond the experimental stage in this country. The
experiments point pretty conclusively, however, to the extensive
adoption of this method in future. It needs but a very simple
STORING AND PRESERVING OF FRUIT. be bry
contrivance to evaporate a quantity of plums for home consump-
tion. I have found a paraffin or gas stove with an oven answer
the purpose excellently. Mr. Philip Crowley, chairman of the
Fruit Committee of the R.H.S., has also found that he can dry
plums in his kitchen oven by placing them on trays after the
cooking for the day is over and the heat is gradually subsiding.
They are left in all night, and the process repeated for three
Fie. 9.
nights in succession. This gives exactly the same process as
that adopted in prune drying in France, plums being much
better when dried and allowed to cool two or three times than
when done at one operation. Some of the plums dried by Mr.
Crowley in this way when soaked in water and cooked were fully
equalto French prunes. It is not, however, all varieties of plums
that are suitable for this process. Tender-skinned varieties
118 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
such as Victoria do not dry well, but varieties such as Prince.
Englebert, Black Diamond, Monarch, Czar, Kirke’s, Emperor,
&e., are excellent for the purpose.
Apples.
This is a fruit that is so much needed in every household
that the best means of keeping up a good supply is of the utmost
importance. What are the conditions required to keep apples,
and how these conditions may be provided, I will now try to
explain. The first condition is that they should be inaccessible
to frost, except it be occasionally two or three degrees.
Secondly, the temperature should be maintained as equable as
possible, and not exposed to any sudden rise or fall. Thirdly,
they should not be too dry. Fourthly, some means of ventila-
tion should be provided when required.
The easiest and cheapest mode of accommodation must, of
course, depend upon the resources that each grower has at hand;
but the needful conditions are more easily and cheaply provided
than many imagine. A cave ina chalk bank or sandhill makes
an admirable apple store, where all the requirements are present
except fitting up the needful shelves and means for ventilating.
Where this is impracticable, it is sometimes the case that a barn
or other farm building may be easily converted into a suitable
store by the construction of an inside lining of match-boarding,
the intermediate space being filled up with sawdust, straw, or
sedge hay. Where, however, none of these means exist, a simple
store may be made as follows:—Select a shady, sheltered
position and excavate the soil to a depth of 2 to 3 feet, accord-
ing to the nature of the soil and means of thorough drainage.
Set out the building to a width of 10 feet and length according
to requirements, build a plain wall to a height of about 8 feet.
above ground, cover with a thick coat of thatch, and line the
rafters with match-boarding. Bank up the outside of the walls
with soil and let the thatch project well over it. This will keep
out frost and maintain aneven temperature. Then form shelves
83 feet wide on each side and about 15 in. apart. A double
window with a shutter should be placed at one end and a double
door at the other, and a ventilator in the gable at each end. A
building thus constructed, 20 feet long and 10 feet wide, would
store about 100 bushels of fruit. Leave the earthen floor, which
STORING AND PRESERVING OF FRUIT. 119
ensures sufficient moisture to keep the fruit plump. The apples
may be placed in layers four or five fruits thick.
‘In gathering fruit for the store room, it is important that it
be left on the tree until it is fully matured. It is better to lose
some by wind rather than to damage the whole by gathering too
soon, the result of this being that the fruit will not only shrivel
but be devoid of its full saccharine flavour. Be careful in placing
the fruit in the room that it is thoroughly dry and free from
damaged or diseased fruits, and when once placed on the shelves
disturb the fruit as little as possible. For the first two or three
weeks after placing in the store give abundance of ventilation,
until all the fruit has ceased to perspire. It may then for the
remainder of the season be kept very close, only occasionally
allowing slight ventilation if there are signs of superfluous
moisture. Alsoclose the shutter to maintain continual darkness.
For choice dessert varieties in the fruit-room, the movable
trays (see figs. 7-9),* will be found most useful in place of fixed
shelves. They permit of the fruit being easily examined at any
time without disturbing by hand, and they are also very
economical of space.
Some of the varieties most suitable for storing are Wellington,
Norfolk Beefing, Claygate Pearmain, Winter Pearmain, or Duck’s
Bill, Mannington’s, Sturmer, Alfriston, Ross Nonpareil, Prince
Albert, Bismarck, and Newton Wonder.
After the store has once been used, be very careful before
filling again to thoroughly cleanse every crevice. Also fumigate
it thoroughly by burning sulphur in it when closed up. This
fumigating, if properly done, will destroy all insects and larve as
well as fungoid germs. A coating of lime wash will help to
sweeten the store.
Evaporation has been tried on a considerable scale for apples,
and a plentiful crop will well pay for the process. The fruit is
pared, cored, and cut into rings by some simple machine, and
then placed on wire trays constructed for the purpose, of which
there are now a number of patents, or a simple oven may be
constructed for the purpose, in which shelves are placed one
above the other, and a brisk heat maintained until all the
moisture is extracted. It is important that a circulation of air
be maintained during the evaporation or else the fruit will cook
* See Advertisements, p. 18.
120 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
and then dry, and will become quite a different product to
properly evaporated fruit. The latter is thus described by an
eminent American chemist:—‘ The diastase or saccharine ferment
contained in all fruit, and which is the primary cause of its decay,
has been rendered inoperative and all germs of animal or vegetable
life have been destroyed by the high heat. It is by this chemical
change which I have briefly described, in uniting a part of the
water already contained in the fruit with the fruit starch, that
these truly evaporated products are rendered more wholesome,
digestible, and indestructible, and are thereby made more
valuable, not only as articles of food, but because they are not
subject to deterioration or loss.”’
The apple rings should be placed in the evaporator im-
mediately after being cut, unless, as is customary when drying
on a large scale, they are first submitted to the fumes of sulphur,
a process called bleaching. This preserves the colour without
damaging the fruit, but it is not needed if the fruit is placed in
the evaporator before it has had time to become discoloured.
Apples, contrary to plums, are best when dried at one time and
occupy from 24 to 5 hours, according to the variety.
The making of cider by small growers has very largely
declined, although attempts are being made to revive it, but
apple juice is used in jelly-making and also for various syrups,
and in seasons when other fruit is scarce a very palatable jam
can be made by a mixture of apples and blackberries.
Pears.
These require quite different treatment from apples, inasmuch
as they would, if placed in the low moist temperature suited to
apples, lose their flavour entirely. Therefore they require a
much drier building, and if possible one where the temperature
can be artificially raised by hot-water pipes or other means.
Pears must not be laid so thickly on the shelves as apples.
With a suitable store and a good selection of varieties, many
useful dessert pears may be kept until February and March.
Stewing pears may also be kept until May and June. Pears
may also be easily preserved in syrup as in France and Italy. |
lor this they are selected before being too ripe, and are pared
and quartered or halved according to size; boil the syrup and
STORING AND PRESERVING OF FRUIT. 121
bottle as directed for plums, &e. They may be either left the
natural colour or tinted with cochineal.
The candying of fruit is an industry largely practised in
France, but has scarcely been attempted in this country. It
requires considerable patience and much nicety to produce the
tasty article sent to our markets from France. The process is
rather tedious, as the fruit requires repeatedly dipping in the
prepared syrup. But there is no reason why the art should not
be practised when once acquired by our women and girls.
In seasons of scarcity of fruit a wholesome jam may be made
from vegetable marrows. These should be used fairly young,
cut into squares and boiled with equal weight of sugar and
flavoured strongly with root-ginger. This makes a very agree-
able preserve to some people.
Green tomatos may also be used in a similar way and
flavoured either with ginger or lemon. Excellent jellies are also
made of Siberian and other crabs, and of the common barberry.
DISCUSSION.
The Rev. W. Winks said that he had experimented somewhat
largely with bottling fruit, and although he differed from Mr.
Cheal in a few points, yet he could most confidently recommend
the system of lock-vacuum self-closing bottles invented by
Messrs. De Luca, of 6 Long Lane, Aldersgate Street. With
these bottles all fruits could be bottled with the greatest possible
ease, and would keep perfectly fresh and good for apparently an
unlimited time. Mr. Wilks differed from Mr. Cheal as to
putting boiling water. He said: The way I proceed is as follows :
I take one of these bottles of Mr. De Luca’s and fill it full of
fruit and shake it down well several times; I then put on the
caps lightly, and place the filled bottles in a boiler filled with
cold water up to the lower part of the necks of the bottles.
The boiler is put on the fire, and as soon as it boils it is allowed
to continue boiling from ten to twenty minutes, when it is taken
off the fire, the cap given a slight screw down, and the bottles
left in the hot water to cool. This is all. It will be noticed
that I put no water whatever inside the bottles with the fruit.
It is perfectly true that by my plan the fruit does, to some extent,
get a little mashed, but it preserves the whole of the flavour
122 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
much better, and, after all, the fruit is going to be made into
pies in winter and spring, so that the preserving its shape is ©
of no great importance—at least in my opinion. If, however,
it is desired to keep the fruits all whole and of good shape,
when the bottles are filled with fruit they should be filled up
about two-thirds with cold water, or with a thin cold syrup,
before they are put in the boiler, and this will prevent the fruits
mashing at all.
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE.
Aprit 6, 1897.
EXAMINERS’ REPORT.
T’o the President and Council of the Royal Horticultural Society.
Gentlemen,—We beg leave to report that we have examined
the papers submitted to us—in all 181.
Of these we selected 87 as worthy to be placed in the first
class, 54 in the second, and 28 in the third. The remainder,
12, are not placed; the number of marks attained being below
100.
The distribution of the examinees were 169 in England, 6 in
Scotland, 1 in Ireland, 1 in Wales.
The present Examination shows a very considerable improve-
ment upon the results of that held in 1896. This will be
apparent from the following comparison of percentages :—
Those not classed are only 12 in number, or nearly one-third
of that last year (34).
The percentage of the third class (100 to 149 marks) has
fallen from 82-2 (1896) to 15-2 (1897).
The percentage of the second class (150 to 199 marks) is
nearly stationary; viz., 34°8 (1896); 29°8 (1897).
The percentage of the first class (200 to 800 marks) has made
the astonishing increase from 10°5 (1896) to 48°38 (1897).
These results are most encouraging. Speaking generally,
the answers are extremely well done. The information is
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE. 128
accurate upon the whole, and the subject matter well expressed.
Perhaps the “Practical Horticulture’? showed, as might be
anticipated, a slight superiority over the ‘‘ Elementary
Principles.”’
GEORGE HENSLow.
JAS. DOUGLAS.
The names and addresses of the successful candidates,
together with the marks assigned to each, are given in the
following Class List, to which is appended the questions set by
the Examiners :—
Crass List.
Maximum number of marks obtainable, 800.
Furst Class. sag ie
*1. Mr. H. 8. Langford, Horticultural College, Swanley . 3800
2. Miss F. M. Broade, Horticultural College, Swanley . 288
2. Mr. J. H. Dick, 8 Victoria Place, Trinity, Edinburgh 288
2. Mr. F. Isted, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 288
2. Miss G. Webb, Horticultural College, Swanley . . 288
6. Miss E. Barratt, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 286
7. Mr. A. J. Cocke, Horticultural College, Swanley . 284
8. Miss O. Field, Horticultural College, Swanley . . 282
8. Mr. J. I. Goodlet, Horticultural College, sil . 282
8. Mr. H. J. Hickin, Tamworth : . 282
11. Mr. H. Reynolds, The Laurels, Fatal Gasaeuii) 279
11. Mr. J. Stone, Board School, Tamworth . a 29
11. Miss F. E. Worland, Horticultural College, eatiey e299
14. Mr. A. D. Hogg, Botanical Gardens, Edinburgh ch2NG
15. Mr. F. H. Harris, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 270
15. Mr. W. Pilcher, Horticultural College, Swanley . 2 ' 270
15. Miss B. §. Watson, Horticultural College, Swanley . 270
18. Mr. H. G. Rogers, Rettenden, Edmonton . 267
19. Mr. C. J. Langley, Technical Laboratory, GiteleAort- 264
19. Mr. E. Miller, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 264
19. Miss A. Morison, Horticultural College, Swanley . 264
22. Mr. E. J. Allard, Botanical Gardens, Cambridge . 258
22. Miss EK. Hodsoll, Horticultural College, Swanley . 258
22. Mr. G. W. Young, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford. 258
* Wins the Society’s Silver Gilt Medal and Chiswick Scholarship.
124 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY
No. of Marks ,
gained.
25. Mr. A. W. Day, Horticultural School, Holmes Chapel,
Cheshire : 255
26. Mr. F. Mason, Whalebon aKa! Chadwell Peat Buses 252
26. Miss G. B. Robertson, Horticultural College, Swanley. 252
28. Miss B. Allman, Horticultural School, Holmes Chapel,
Cheshire ; . 250
29. Mr. A. D. Berney, Floriinulial Colas: eral . 246
29. Mr. C. H. Hooper, Horticultural College, Swanley . 246
29. Mr. F. M. Newton, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford 246
29. Mr. A. W. Snipe, Tamworth . : ‘ : . 246
29. Mr. KE. H. Wilson, Kew : : . 246
34. Mr. W. Hales, 16 Gloucester Bei Kew ‘ . 248
35. Mr. W. J. Flower, Horticultural College, Byes . 240
35. Mr. J. H. Jones, Board School, Tamworth . : . 240
35. Miss F. Petty, Horticultural College, Swanley . . 240
35. Miss F. Potter, Horticultural College, Swanley . . 240
35. Mr. H. Stapley, Rose Cottage, Gatten Park Road,
Redhill . : : . 240
35. Mr. G. C. Watson, 626 Ee Road, ene oe ; . 240
35. Miss E. J. Welsford, Horticultural College, Swanley . 240
42. Mr. M. Paton, Stewarton, Ayrshire . : . 287
483. Mr. W. R. Reader, Osmaston Manor, Daan : . 287
43. Mr. E. Smith, Montford, Brierfield, Burnley . 287
45. Mr. C. Leeson, Wrawby, Brigg . : . 235
45, Mr. G. Underwood, 23 Free School Lane, Leicesiel . 286
47. Mr. A. Edwards, 47 Russell Street, Cambridge . . 284
47. Mr. H. Martin, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 284
47. Miss J. Newsham, Horticultural College, Swanley . 284
47, Miss E. Vaughan, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford. 234
51. Mr. A. J. Dover, Eccleshall, Staffordshire . ; . 282
51. Mr. D. Rutherford, Tutbury, Burton-on-Trent . . 282
58. Mr. A. E. Burgess, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford 228
58. Mr. O. D. Carter, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 228
53. Mr. F. A. Dance, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 228
58. Mr. H. F. Easton, Puller Road, High Barnet, Herts. . 228
58. Mr. W. H. Elbourn, 74 Russell Street, Cambridge . 228
58. Mr. W. Lord, Milburn Gardens, Esher, Surrey . . 228
58. Miss M. White, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 228
60. Mr. J. Banting, Pontyclun, Llantrisant, Monmouth . 227
60. Mr. W. J. Bell, Upper Tean, Stoke-on-Trent . . 227
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE. 125
No. of Marks
62. Mr. F. Holt, Park View Nursery, Accrington e995
62. Mr. W. Robinson, Hawk’s House, Brierfield, ae 225
64. Mr. C. Bishop, Board School, Tamworth 299
64. Mr. N. Collard, Horticultural College, Swanley . 999
66. Mr. W. H. White, 3 Avenue Extension, Clarendon
Park, Leicester 220
67. Mr. J. H. Annear, Technical Thmarston Ghalmhatora 219
68. Mr. E. D. Smith, Technical School, Gravesend . 217
69. Miss F. Andrews, Technical School, Gravesend . 915
70. Mr. E. J. Callender, Horticultural College, Swanley 213
70. Mr. EK. C. Kenny, Horticultural College, Swanley 213
72. Mr. 8. G. Wilcock, Boroughbridge, York ; 212
73. Mr. F. K. Derbyshire, Horticultural School, Folks:
Chapel, Cheshire i / 210
73. Mr. C. Gosling, Goring-on- Thamits 210
73. Mr. W. Hunter, Great Ayton 21C
73. Mr. B. G. Nettleton, Technical Maioratery: Chelwstord 210
77. Mr. H. Brook, 171 Every Street, Nelson ; 207
78. Mr. R. Bellerby, Askham Grange Gardens, ees
Richard . : ' ; 20&
78. Mr. R. Francis, Backaale: Sedeuadk ‘ f 205
78. Mr. J. Read, Horticultural School, Holmes etapa,
Cheshire : , . 205
78. Mr. H. Ward, Vine Seieane: Ghai: ae ; 205
82. Mr. H. W. Jackson, 60 Russell Street, Cambridge 204
82. Mr. A. C. Pickford, Horticultural College, Swanley 204
84. Mr. H. Baker, Castle Ashby, Northampton 200
84. Mr. D. R. Hicks, Sandon, Stone, Staffordshire . 200
84. Mr. J. Laws, 8 Walnut Tree Place, Wimbledon . 200
84, Mr. J. Slack, Horticultural School, Holmes ae
Cheshire : ; 200
Second Class.
1. Mr. W. Sproston, Great Haywood, Staffordshire . é 198
2. Mr. E. W. Ashley, Botolph Claydon Board School,
Winslow * : : << ee
2. Mr. W. H. Kidwell, Balbribh: Staffordshire ‘ 197
4, Mr. G. W. Hunt, South Knighton Road, Leicester 195
5. Mr. F. A. Gwilliam, Palace Gardens, Gloucester 192
5. Mr. G. B. Pratt, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford 192
126 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
No. of fe
7. Mr. C. H. Burden, Horticultural College, Swanley . "189
7. Mr. A. Fairfield, Glascote Heath, Tamworth : . 189
7. Mr. J. W. Thompson, Holywath Cottage, Coniston . 189
10. Mr. W. Cranfield, 3 Coronation Street, Cambridge . 186
10. Miss C. M. Hull, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 186
12. Mr. D. P. Bass, Bednall, Staffordshire ; ‘ . Be
12. Mr. J. J. Cooper, School House, Walsall. ; -. 286
12. Mr. J. Jeffery, Moor Court Gardens, Oakamoor,
Stoke-on-Trent. : . : 4 ; eee
12. Miss M. Mackenzie, Horticultural School, Holmes
Chapel, Cheshire . ; : ; . 185
12. Mr. A. W. A. Shaw, Great Ayia: R. g, Osis ; . 185
12. Mr. G. Wicking, Clarendon Park, Leicester , << ioe
18. Mr. U. Warren, 20 Woodville Terrace, Darwen . . 182
19. Miss B. Hay, Horticultural College, Swanley . . 180
19. Mr. J. W. Heweson, Great Ayton ; 180
19. Mr. J. Hardy, Horticultural School, Holmes Gnd
Cheshire : : ee
19. Miss E. Watts, Hortieniaral Gialleek, ‘Ameen ; . 180
19. Mr. J. Wilkinson, 73 Devonshire Street, Accrington . 180
24. Mr. W. Ingram, Board School, Kettlebrook Road,
Tamworth . : ~ Let
24. Mr. J. Thompson, Horta Ciliten. Swaine me ys
26. Mr. W. Bowyer, 22 Rowland Grove, Wells Road,
Sydenham, S.E. . : : A Et
26. Mr. A. Cutter, High Street, Chatiant, Harts : mee i
26. Mr. E. Semper, Scawby Hall, Lincoln : : 28
26. Mr. A. Taylor, Great Ayton ; 175
30. Mr. W. G. Hatch, 2 Windsor Road, Batheni on- Se 174
30. Mr. W. J. Reed, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 174
80. Mr. W. Kenny, Horticultural College, Swanley . .
83. Mr. E. Timson, Leicester Frith, Leicester : . 168
84. Mr. A. Bennett, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 167
85. Mr. W. Jennings, Horticultural School, Holmes
Chapel, Cheshire . ; j . 166
86. Mr. 8. Laskey, Castle Hill Gastins: Hehain : ‘” 26
86. Mr. R. Lyon, Greenhall, High Blantyre . . - 165
86. Mr. A. D. Morris, Barrowmore Hall, Chester . .. 165
36. Mr. A. Shaw, Broad Royal Head, Staincross, Barnsley 165
86. Mr. H. Spooner, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 165
gained.
41. Mr. J. Benson, Technical Institute, Aughton ‘ . 160
41. Mr. W. Burgess, Bredon Norton, Tewkesbury . . 16em
41. Mr. W. Bygrave, Barkway, Royston, Herts . 160
41. Mr. Jos. Poulter, Clayton le Moors, Accrington . . L6G
45. Mr. F. Lazenby, Botanic Gardens, Cambridge . . -159
46. Mr. S. Barritt, Technical Laboratory, Chelmsford . 156
46. Mr. J. Kent, Tamworth .. : ; «) 166
46. Mr. §. 8. Mundy, Tamworth . : . 156
49, Mr. J. Barkham, Longford House Canine Haven
Street, Ryde . : ae
49. Mr. L. Farmer, Besteulintal Gallego ener . 150
49. Mr. W. Godsmark, Great Ayton : ; : - 2650
49. Mr. G. Hallam, Wellingore, Lincoln . : > doo
49. Mr. KE. F. Jeffrey, Horticultural College, Swanley a oe
49. Mr. H. E. Wainright, Tamworth i : « ae
Third Class.
1. Mr. H. Owen Weddell, Surbiton . : 145
2. Mr. H. Crawley, Grange Lodge, inencton Bivenoate 140
2. Mr. C. Cundy, Sudbury, Suffolk : ‘ . 140
2. Mr. A. Osborn, Sonning . 140
2. Mr. W. Goddard, The Lodge, Kvishton Hall, neces 140
6. Mr. L. Hales, Horticultural College, Swanley . . 1388
7. Mr. G. Gay, Doncaster : he 5
7. Mr. J. Prescott, Technical ers feet . +408
9. Mr. R. Hudson, Swaffam, Norfolk . F : RISO
9. Mr. R. Jones, Technical Institute, Aughton : << ee
9. Mr. G. M. Stuart, Eden, Banff . ‘ : ‘ . 380
12. Mr. M. Gravestone, Harris Institute, Preston . . , 125
12. Mr. G. J. Goodall, Streathy, Oxon . . 125
12. Mr. J. Chas. Tate, Bulmer, Welburn, Fouks : aes by
15. Mr. H. Broadbent, Park Hall, Evesham . . 120
15. Mr. W. Grantham, Technical Institute, es ahitar . 120
15. Mr. J. H. Jones, Horticultural School, Holmes “aah
Cheshire ; 120
15. Mr. Thos. Windle, 9 Turnford Villas, a a . e20
19. Mr. C. Rhymes, 28 Cottage Grove, Surbiton : .
20
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE. 127
No. of Marks
. Mr. Th. Cheesman, Fairmile Hatch, Cobham . . eG
128 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
No. of Marks
E gained.
20. Mr. R. Crichton, Sutton House, Baldoyle, Dublin . 115
22. Mr. E. R. Christiansen, Cheshunt Street, Cheshunt . 110
22. Mr. W. Hind, Technical Institute, Aughton ‘ ¢ ag
22. Mr. O. H. Burley, Milburn Gardens, Esher : . 2G
25. Mr. G. W. Brookbank, Wimbledon . : .. .a08
25. Mr. G. C. Farrant, The Cottage, Stoke D’ ‘Abeinall
Cobham : : : : . 105
25. Mr. C. J. Illsley, The Tilt, Gaiitiean : : ; . 105
28. Mr. T. H. Smith, The Tilt, Cobham . : : . 100
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY’S EXAMINATION
IN HORTICULTURE.
Aprit 6, 1897.
QUESTIONS.
Eight questions only to be answered ; four from Division A and four from
Division B.
DIVISION A.
ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES.
1. What are the three chief mineral ingredients of a soil? Name
garden plants or shrubs which delight in each kind respectively.
2. What differences may be expected from growing unripe, perfectly
ripe, and long-kept seeds respectively ?
3. In transplanting, why is it necessary to preserve the extreme and
most delicate tips of the root-fibrils ?
4. Why does covering Rhubarb redden and lengthen the leaf-stalks
and stop the growth of the blade?
5. Describe the structure of a hyacinth bulb, and explain why the
Dutch method of slashing or hollowing out the bottom induces the forma-
tion of bulbils?
6. What are the essential conditions for successful grafting ?
7. How does the structure of a plum differ from that of an apple?
Explain the origin of each.
8. Name the Natural Orders or Families to which the following plants
belong :—Cyclamen, Rhododendron, Clematis, Stock, Pelargonium, Borage,
Potato, Onion, Parsley and Turnip.
TRIAL OF CABBAGES FOR SPRING USE AT CHISWICK, 1896-7. 129
DIVISION B.
HORTICULTURAL PRACTICE.
9. Explain the process of cross-fertilisation in garden flowers, and give
examples of both hardy and exotic plants that have been improved thereby.
10. After seed of the Chinese Primula has been ripened describe the
method of sowing and subsequent treatment of the plants up to the
period of their flowering.
11. What is the native country of the celery plant, and under what
conditions does it grow naturally? Give a short account of its culture,
such as time of sowing and subsequent treatment.
12. When and under what conditions is Sea Kale found in a wild state?
Describe its culture and state the time of the year it is in use.
13. Where is the common Asparagus said to be found in a wild state?
State all you know of its culture, and for how long a period it may be had
in use.
14. Give an account of the Apple. How are the trees propagated ?
State what you know of its culture, and the diseases to which the trees are
liable, and the remedies. Name one good cooking variety for use in each
month from August to April inclusive.
15. State all you know about the Raspberry. What sort of soil is best
adapted to its culture? Give method of training and pruning, and the
best varieties to cultivate, both yellow and red.
16. Give an account of the usual method of Gooseberry culture adopted
in gardens; and also the Lancashire method to obtain prize fruit. Name
six of the best prize varieties and six best for ordinary garden culture.
TRIAL OF CABBAGES FOR SPRING USE AT CHISWICK,
1896-7.
A collection of forty-five stocks of cabbages were sown on
August 7, 1896, with a view of testing their earliness for spring
use, hardiness, and freedom from running to seed. The collec-
tion was planted out, immediately the plants were large enough,
on a south border, and probably owing to the late date of sowing
there was a remarkable absence of running to seed in all the
varieties. All the varieties in condition were examined by the
Fruit and Vegetable Committee on June 15, 1897.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
1. Best of All (Barr)—Stem short; heads firm, conical,
and of large size, with small compact outer leaves. Ready for use
June 1.
2. Blackwell Karly (Kent & Brydon).—Stem short; heads
firm, roundish, of medium size, heavy, with spreading outer
leaves. Ready for use May 20.
3. Cattell’s Reliance (Nutting)—Stem short; heads firm,
K
180 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
conical, medium size, with small outer leaves. A handsome
variety. Ready for use June 2.
4, Cavalier (Dobbie).—A large coarse kale.
5. Chou de Burghley (Barr).—Stem rather long; heads
fairly firm, long and conical, with upright outer leaves. Late
and uncertain in forming heads.
6. Chou de Milan (Vilmorin).—A savoy.
7. Chou Gouffre d’Hiver (Vilmorin).—Late, of no value for
spring use.
8 & 9. Couve Tronchuda (Barr & R. Veitch).—Only useful for
winter use; no value for spring.
10. Chou de Brunswick (Vilmorin).—Late, of no value for
spring use.
11. Christmas Drumhead (Barr).—A.M. December 12, 1893.
Only valuable for autumn and winter use.
12. Dwarf Autumn Cutting (Barr)._-Stem short; heads
firm, conical, and small, with a large spread of outer leaves.
Ready for use June 4.
18 & 14. Early Dwarf York (Barr & J. Veitch).—Stem
moderately long; heads firm, conical, and of medium size, with
a large spread of outer leaves. Ready for use June 12.
15. Early Small White Erfurt (Benary).—A spreading flat
variety of no use for spring cutting.
16. Early Offenham (J. Veitch).—Stem short; heads firm,
large, and conical, with a small spread of outer leaves. Very
compact. Ready for use May 26.
17. Earliest of All (R. Veitch).—A.M. June 15, 1897. Stem
short ; heads firm, conical, of medium size, with a very small
spread of outer leaves; standing well without bursting. - Ready
for use May 15.
18 & 19. Ellam’s Early Dwarf (J. Veitch & Nutting).—A.M.
April 8, 1884. Stem short; heads firm, conical, medium size,
with a small spread of outer leaves. Ready for use June 12.
20. Fidler or Pomeranium Pointed Head (Benary).—Tall,
spreading. No value as a spring variety.
21. First and Best (Hurst)—Stem short; heads conical, of
moderate size, with a small spread of outer leaves. Ready for
use May 19.
22. Hardy Green Colewort (J. Veitch).—Excellent as a cole-
wort, but of no value as a cabbage.
TRIAL OF CABBAGES FOR SPRING USE AT CHISWICK, 1896-7. 13]
23. Henderson’s Succession (Henderson).—Late ; with large
spreading leaves. Only useful for autumn cutting.
24 & 25. Improved Nonpareil (J. Veitch & Nutting).—Stem
short; heads firm, conical, of medium size, with a small spread
of outer leaves. Ready for use June 1.
26. Large White Solid Magdeburg (Benary).—No use as a
spring variety.
27. Largest White Schweinfurt (Benary).—No use asa spring
variety.
28. Large White Brunswick (Benary)—No use7as a spring
variety.
29. Large York (Barr).—See No. 2.
30. Large Early Conical (Benary).—Late ; tall, spreading.
No use as @ spring variety.
31. Little Gem (Sutton).—A.M. September 10, 1895. Stem
short; heads firm, small, and conical, with small spreading outer
leaves. Ready for use June 15.
82. Leeds Market (Nutting) A.M. September 10, 1895. Stem
short; heads firm, conical, and large, with a moderate spread of
outer leaves. Ready for use June 19.
33. Magdeburg (Dobbie).—See No. 26.
34. Matchless (J. Veitch).—Stem short ; heads firm, slightly
conical, of medium size, with a very small spread of outer leaves.
Ready for use June 12.
35. Robert Wrench (Wrench).—Stem short; heads firm,
bluntly conical, and of large size, with a wide spread of outer
leaves. Ready for use May 23.
36. Rossette Colewort (J. Veitch).—A fine early colewort. Of
no value as a cabbage.
87. St. John’s Day (J. Veitch).—A.M. September 10, 1895.
Stem short ; heads sharply conical, of medium size, with rather
spreading outer leaves. Ready for use June 4.
38. St. John’s Day Earliest Flat (Benary).—Stem short ;
heads round, flat, and loose. Not much value for spring use.
Ready for use June 12.
39. Sutton’s Earliest (Sutten).—A.M. June 15,1897. Stem
short ; heads firm, conical, medium size, with small outer leaves.
A handsome variety standing well without bursting. Ready for
use May 15.
k 2
182 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
40. Sugar Loaf (Barr).—A dark green form of No.2. Ready
for use June 15.
41. Superfine Early Dwarf York (Barr).—A.M. September 10,
1895. A greatly improved dark green form of Nos. 13 and 14.
Ready for use June 12.
42. The John o’ Groats (Holmes).—Stem short; heads firm,
conical, medium size, with very small outer leaves. A handsome
variety. Ready for use June 2.
43. Ulm Quintzl Large White (Benary).—Tall and late. No
use as @ Spring variety.
44, Winningstadt (J. Veitch)—A.M. September 10, 1895.
Very large and late. Of no use as a spring variety.
45. Winningstadt Sugar-Loaf (Benary).—An inferior form of
No. 44.
REPORT ON BROAD BEANS AT CHISWICK, 1897.
Six stocks of Broad Beans were received for trial in 1896, but,
proving a failure in that year, they were again tried in 1897.
The seeds were sown March 25 on ground deeply trenched and
well manured. All the stocks made good growth, and were
examined by the Fruit and Vegetable Committee on July 1.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
x x x =Highly Commended.
1. Champion (Dobbie & Co.).—A.M. July 1, 1897. Pods light
green, and freely produced, averaging six beans in long and very
straight pods; very heavy crop; height 2 feet. Ready for use
June 28.
2. Exhibition Long Pod (R. Veitch).—A.M. July 1, 1897.
Pods grass-green, long and straight, with a distinct curve
at the stalk, averaging six beans in the pods; heavy crop;
height 25 feet. Ready for use July 1.
3. Green Long Pod (Sutton & Sons).—Pods dark green,
rather short, averaging three beans in each; heavy crop ; height
2 feet. Ready for use June 28.
4. Improved Broad Windsor (Johnson).—A good form of the
old Windsor Bean.
5. Robin Hood (Harrison & Sons).— x x x July 1, 1897.
Pods dark green, moderately long and straight, averaging four
REPORT ON PEAS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 133
beans in each; heavy crop; height 2 feet. Ready for use
July 1.
6. Taylor’s Broad Windsor (Sutton & Sons).—Pods deep
green and short, averaging three very large beans in each ; good
crop; height 23 feet. Ready for use July 1.
REPORT ON PEAS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897.
Fifty-three stocks of Peas were grown for trial in the gardens ;
of these, six varieties were well-known and popular sorts—viz.
Chelsea Gem, Ne Plus Ultra, Autocrat, Duke of Albany, Sharpe’s
Queen, and William the First—which were grown for comparison
with the new varieties sent. The peas, with two exceptions (seed
received late), were all sown on March 25, on ground trenched
2 ft. deep and well manured. In almost every case the growth
was good, the crops satisfactory, and free from mildew. Two
meetings were held by the Fruit and Vegetable Committee to
examine the stocks. The first meeting was held on July 1 to
examine the early varieties, and the second meeting on July 14
to inspect the later ones.
F.C.C.=First Class Certificate.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
x xX =Commended.
1. Autocrat (J. Veitch & Sons).—F.C.C. 1885. Haulm and
pods dark green, pods in pairs, averaging six large sweet peas in
each straight pod ; flavour excellent. A splendid late variety ;
height, 3 feet. Ready for use July 14. Seed wrinkled.
2. Bucks Royalty (Kent & Brydon).—Haulm and pods very
dark green, pods in pairs, averaging seven large deep green peas
in straight pods; flavour good; moderate crop; very similar to
No. 6 in appearance; height, 3 feet. Ready for use July 1. Seed
wrinkled.
3. Chelsea Gem (J. Veitch & Sons).—A well-known and
favourite early variety, maintaining its fame as a heavy-cropping
early variety ; height, 18 inches. Ready for use June 20. Seed
wrinkled.
4. Captain Cuttle (Hurst & Sons).—A.M. July 14, 1897.
Haulm and pods dark green, pods in pairs, averaging seven large
134 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
peas in slightly curved pods; flavour excellent; very heavy crop
and stood:ihe dry weather well; height, 35 feet. Ready for use
July 14. Seed wrinkled. :
5. Compactum (Laxton).—Haulm and pods very dark green,
pods in'pairs, averaging seven large deep green peas in straight
pods; flavour fair; heavy crop; height 2 feet. Ready for use
June 25. Seed wrinkled.
6. Cross No. 1 (Nutting)—Haulm and pods deep green, pods
in pairs, averaging seven large peas in straight pods; flavour
good ; very similar to Autocrat; height, 3 feet. Ready for use
July 14. Seeds wrinkled.
7. De Clamant Nain Hatif (Vilmorin).—Haulm and pods dark
green, pods in pairs, averaging five medium-size peas in straight
pods ; flavour poor; heavy crop; height,{18 inches. Ready for
use July 1. Seeds round.
8. Darlington Gem (Kent & Brydon).—Haulm and pods dark
green, pods single, averaging six large bright green peas in
straight pods; flavour good; moderate crop; height, 12 inches.
Ready for use June 25. Seeds wrinkled.
9. Darlington Prize Winner (Kent & Brydon).—Haulm and
pods very dark green, pods in pairs, averaging seven large deep
green peas in straight pods; flavour good; moderate crop;
height, 3 feet. Ready for use July 1. Seeds wrinkled.
10. Diamond Jubilee (Eckford)—Haulm and pods bright
green, pods in pairs, averaging seven large peas in straight-
pointed pods; flavour good; moderate crop; height, 6 feet.
Ready for use July 11. Seeds wrinkled.
11. Duke of Albany (J. Veitch & Sons).—Haulm and pods
bright green, pods usually in pairs, averaging seven large peas
in slightly curved pods; flavour good; a well-known exhibition
variety ; height, 5feet. Ready for use June 29. Seeds wrinkled.
12. Early Laxton (Laxton)—Haulm and pods pale green,
pods single, averaging seven large grass-green peas in straight
blunt pods; flavour fair; heavy crop; height,4feet. Ready for
use June 25. Seeds wrinkled.
13. Karly Market (Watkins & Simpson).—Haulm and pods
dull green, pods in pairs, averaging seven medium-size peas in
slightly curved pods; heavy crop; very like an improved William
the First; height, 3 feet. Ready for use June 23. Seeds
wrinkled. ‘
REPORT ON PEAS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 185
14. Exeels All (Long).—A form of Ne Plus Ultra; height,
5 feet. “Ready for use July 14.
15. Fidler’s Queen (Fidler). Haulm and pods grass-green,
pods in pairs, averaging seven large pale green peas in straight
pods ; flavour good ; moderate crop; height 15 feet. Ready for
use July 1. Seeds wrinkled.
16. Fidler’s No. 2 (Fidler). Haulm and pods bright green,
pods in pairs, averaging eight large deep green peas in slightly
curved pods; goodcrop. A variety of the Duke of Albany form.
Height 5 feet. Ready for use July 1. Seeds wrinkled.
17. First Early Seedling (Nash). Haulm and pods dark
green, pods in pairs, averaging six bright green peas in straight
pods; flavour fair; moderate crop; very similar to English
Wonder. Height 20 inches. Ready for use June 25. Seeds
wrinkled.
18. Goldfinder (R. Veitch). Haulm and pods light green,
pods usually single, averaging six large green peas in straight
blunt pods; flavour excellent. A good early form of Ne Plus
Ultra ; height 4 feet. Ready for use July 9. Seeds wrinkled.
19. Gros Bleu Nain (Vilmorin). Haulm and pods dark
green, pods in pairs, averaging six medium-size peas in straight
pods; flavour fair; good crop; height 20inches. Ready for use
June 25. Seeds round.
20. Harbinger (Dickson’s).— x x July 1, 1897. Haulm and
pods grass-green, pods in pairs, averaging six medium-size pale
green peas in straight pods; extraordinary crop. This should
prove a valuable market variety; flavour good; height 4 feet.
Ready for use June 25. Seeds wrinkled.
21. Honeydew (Sim). Haulm and pods very dark green,
pods in pairs, averaging five large pale green peas in straight
pods ; flavour excellent ; moderate crop; height 2 feet. Ready
for use June 30. Seeds wrinkled.
22. Improved Gem (Hurst & Sons). This variety is very
similar to Chelsea Gem, but is rather more robust. Ready for
use June 23.
23. Island Queen (Heaton). Same as Ne Plus Ultra.
24. King of the Earlies (Yates). Haulm and pods pale
green, pods usually single, averaging six large peas in straight
pods ; flavour good ; heavy crop; height 3 feet. Ready for use
June 23. Seeds round.
186 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
25. Little Duke (Watkins & Simpson). Haulm and pods
dark green, pods in pairs, averaging five large peas in straight
pods ; flavour good; crop moderate ; height 2 feet. Ready for
use July 4. Seeds wrinkled.
26. Large Edible Podded (R.H.S.). See No. 48.
27. Magi (Eckford). Haulm and pods very dark green, pods
in pairs, averaging eight large peas in straight handsome pods ;
moderate crop; flavour very good. This should prove a fine
exhibition variety. Height 3 feet. Ready for use July 10.
Seeds wrinkled.
28. Magnificent (Hurst & Sons) MHaulm and pods dark
green, pods in pairs, averaging six large deep green peas in
straight blunt pods; heavy crop; flavour good; height 54 feet.
Ready for use June 25. Seeds wrinkled.
29. Majestic (Watkins & Simpson).—A.M. July 14, 1897.
Haulm and pods dark green, pods in pairs, averaging seven
large peas in straight pods; flavour excellent ; very heavy crop ;
height 24 feet. Ready for use July 14. Seeds wrinkled.
80. Monarch (Eckford). Haulm and pods dark green, pods
in pairs, averaging eight large peas in straight pods; flavour
good ; moderate crop; height 24 feet. Ready for use July 14.
Seeds wrinkled.
31. New No. 1 (Kckford). Haulm and pods deep green,
pods in pairs, averaging six large peas in straight pods of the Ne
Plus Ultra type; flavour good; heavy crop; height 5 feet.
Ready for use July 1. Seeds wrinkled.
32. New Giant Marrow (Kckford). UHaulm and pods grass-
green, pods single, averaging five large pale green peas in
straight pods; flavour good; moderate crop; height 43 feet.
Ready for use July 1. Seeds wrinkled.
33. New Seedling (Carter’s). Haulm and pods very dark
green, pods in pairs, averaging six large dark green peas in
straight pods: flavour good; moderate crop; height 2 feet.
Ready for use June 25. Seeds wrinkled.
84. Ne Plus Ultra (J. Veitch & Sons). A well-known,
excellent variety; height 54 feet. Ready for use July 14.
Seeds wrinkled.
35. Prince Edward (Cooper, Taber & Co.).—Haulm and pods
dark green, pods in pairs, averaging six large deep green peas in
straight pods. Very like Ne Plus Ultra in appearance, but
REPORT ON PEAS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 137
earlier. Flavour excellent; moderate crop; height 5 feet.
Ready for use July 1. Seeds wrinkled.
36. Perfection (R. Veitch)—A.M. July 14, 1897. Haulm
and pods grass-green, pods in pairs, averaging six very large
deep green peas in straight pods; flavour excellent ; very heavy
crop. This variety is the original stock grown by Messrs. R.
Veitch & Son for forty years. Height 3} feet. Ready for use
July 14. Seeds wrinkled.
37. Profit (Laxton).—Very similar in every respect to
No. 12, except that the peas are somewhat sweeter in this
variety.
38. Pollett’s New Wrinkled (Hurst & Sons).—This variety
was grown in the trials of 1896 under the name of Pluperfect
Marrow, and also as Pollett’s Early Marrow. The crop
was heavy both in 1896 and 1897, and the flavour good
each season. Height 5 feet. Ready for use June 28. Seeds
wrinkled.
39. Potentate (Eckford)—Haulm and pods pale green, pods
in pairs, averaging six large peas in straight pods; flavour
good; moderate crop; height 5 feet. Ready for use July 14.
Seeds wrinkled.
40. Pioneer (Eckford).—Haulm and pods dark green, pods
in pairs, averaging five large peas in straight blunt pods; flavour
fair; moderate crop; height 43 feet. Ready for use July 4.
Seed wrinkled.
41. Prior (Eckford)—Haulm and pods grass-green, pods
single, averaging nine large peas in straight pointed pods ; flavour
good ; moderate crop; height 44 feet. Ready for use July 8.
Seeds wrinkled.
42. Pride of Notts (Bell).—Not a success. Seeds received
late.
43. Record (Hurst & Sons).—Haulm and pods bright green,
pods in pairs, averaging six large peas in straight pods; flavour
good; heavy crop; height 44 feet. Ready for use June 28.
Seeds wrinkled.»
44. Rex (Eckford).—Haulm and podg light green, pods in
pairs, averaging six large peas in straight blunt pods; flavour
good; moderate crop; height 4 feet. Ready for use July 14.
Seeds wrinkled.
45. Royalty (Eckford)—Haulm and pods deep green, pods
188 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
single, averaging seven large peas in straight pods; flavour
good; heavy crop; height 4 feet. Ready for use July 14. Seeds
wrinkled.
46. Saccharine (Sim).— x x July 1, 1897. Haulm and pods
dark green, pods in pairs, averaging seven large deep green peas
in straight pods; flavour very sweet and good; moderate crop;
height 5 feet. Ready for use June 29. Seeds wrinkled.
47. Sharpe’s Queen (J. Veitch & Sons).—Haulm and pods
dark green, pods in pairs, averaging five large peas in straight
pods; flavour very good; heavy crop; height 3 feet. Ready for
use July 14. Seeds wrinkled.
48. Sans Parchemin Hatifi Large Cosse (Vilmorin).— x x
July 1, 1897. This is the largest form of the edible podded
varieties. The pods and peas are cooked as gathered, and are of
really excellent flavour. The labour of shelling the peas is
avoided, the crop is heavy, and the variety is well worthy of a
trial in any garden. Height 35 feet. Ready for use July 1.
49. Springtide (Carter)—Haulm and pods dark green, pods
in pairs, averaging six medium-size peas in straight pods;
flavour fair; height 3 feet. Ready for use June 21. Seeds
wrinkled.
50. St. Osyth Gem (Carter).—Haulm and pods dark green,
pods in pairs, averaging four large peas in straight pods; flavour
very good; moderate crop; height 2 feet. Ready for use
June 25. Seeds wrinkled.
51. The Bruce (Eckford).—Haulm and pods pale green, pods
in pairs, averaging seven large peas in straight pods; flavour
good ; heavy crop; height 43 feet. Ready for use July 14. Seeds
wrinkled.
52. World’s Wonder (Weir).—Not a success. Seeds received
late.
58. William the First (J. Veitch & Sons).—F.C.C. 1872. A
well-known early variety. Height 3 feet. Ready for use
June 21. Seeds wrinkled.
REPORT ON FORCED FRENCH BEANS AT CHISWICK, 1897. 139
REPORT ON FORCED FRENCH BEANS AT CHISWICK,
1897.
Thirty-six stocks of dwarf French beans were sown on
January 15, in 10-inch pots, five beans in each pot, and three
pots of each variety. No hard forcing was done, all being
srown on gradually, and, with three exceptions, the whole of
the stocks grew well, and produced good crops of pods, which
were examined by the Committee on April 21st.
F.C.C.= First Class Certificate.
A.M.= Award of Merit.
1. Canadian Wonder (Dammann & Co.).—See No. 4. First
pods ready April 19.
2. Canadian Wonder Improved (Watkins & Simpson).—See
No. 4. First pods ready April 12.
3. Covent Garden Harly Negro (Watkins and Simpson).—
Seeds black, dwarf; pods medium size; good crop. First pods
ready April 12.
4. Crimson Flageolet (Dammann & Co.).—Seeds purple ;
tall, large foliage; pods long, pale green; heavy crop. First
pods ready April 12.
The Committee decided that Canadian Wonder is synonym-
ous with this variety, and that Crimson Flageolet is the original
and correct name.
5. Early Favourite (J. Veitch & Sons).—A.M. April 21, 1897.
Seeds speckled, dwarf, compact habit; pods of medium size ; very
heavy crop. First pods ready April 14.
6. Early Pale Dun (J. Veitch & Sons).—Seeds brown, dwarf,
vigorous ; pods of medium size ; moderate crop. First pods ready
April 12.
7. Early Prolific (Dobbie & Co.).—Seeds speckled, dwarf,
compact ; pods of medium size and heavily splashed with purple ;
heavy crop. First pods ready April 14.
8. Early Wonder (J. Veitch & Sons).—Seeds speckled, dwarf,
compaet ; pods long, and heavy crop, but requires further selec-
tion. First pods ready April 12.
9. Earliest of All (Dobbie & Co.).—Seeds speckled, dwarf ;
pods rather long; moderate crop. First pods ready April 12.
10. Early White Prolific (Watkins & Simpson).—Seeds
140 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
white, dwarf, compact ; pods medium size ; good crop. First pods
ready April 8.
11. Earliest White-seeded (Benary).—Very similar to No. 10.
12. Emperor William (Benary).—A.M., April 21,1897. Seeds
white, very dwarf; pods long, broad and fieshy ; moderate crop.
First pods ready April 1. ‘The earliest variety in the collection.
13. Gloire de Lyon (Benary).—Seeds speckled, dwarf; pods
long; rather light crop. First pods ready April 14.
14. Golden Wax Improved (Henderson, New York).—Seeds
speckled, dwarf, compact ; pods medium size, yellow and hand-
some; good crop. First pods ready April 20.
15. Golden Wax Pod (Barr & Son).—A.M. April 21, 1897.
Seeds dark brown, dwarf, very compact; pods long, bright
yellow; heavy crop. First pods ready April 12. The best
variety of its section.
16. Golden Butter Wax (Benary).—Seeds black, very
dwarf, compact; pods medium size, yellow; good crop. First
pods ready April 12.
17. Green Haricot (Barr & Son).—Seeds greenish white,
dwarf, growth weak; pods medium size, yellow; good crop.
First pods ready April 14.
18. Heinemann’s Forcing (Heinemann).—Ordinary stock.
19. 5 , mi Seed saved from
selected plants in the open air.
20. Heinemann’s Forcing.—Seed saved from forced plants.
All three stocks of this variety made weak growth, and were
practically a failure.
21. Inexhaustible (Vilmorin).—Seeds white, very dwarf and
compact ; pods medium size; good crop. First pods ready
April 12.
22. Improved Mohawk (Wythes).—A.M. April 21, 1897.
Seeds speckled, dwarf; pods long and handsome ; heavy crop.
First pods ready April 14.
23. King of the Wax (Vilmorin).—Seeds white, dwarf; pods
medium size, bright yellow; good crop. First pods ready
April 12.
24 & 25. Ne Plus Ultra (J. Veitch & Sons, and Watkins &
Simpson).—A.M. April 21, 1897. Seeds pale brown, dwarf; pods
above the average size; very heavy crop. First pods ready
April 12.
REPORT ON STRAWBERRIES GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 141
26. Negro Algiers (Dammann & Co.).—Seeds black ; very
tall; pods medium size; moderate crop. First pods ready
April 14.
27. Negro Long-pod (Dammann & Co.).—Seeds black; very
similar to No. 26, but six days later.
28 & 29. Osborne’s Forcing (Watkins & Simpson, & Dam-
mann & Co.).—F.0.0. Aug. 5, 1873.—Seeds speckled, dwarf and
compact ; pods rather long ; very heavy crop. First pods ready
April 14.
30. Perkins’ Red-speckled (Dammann & Co.).—Seeds speckled.
The plants are inclined to run, and are late, and not adapted for
forcing.
81. Sensation (Heimemann).—Seeds speckled, dwarf, com-
pact; pods short; heavy crop. First pods ready April 21.
32. Stringless (Carter & Co.).—Seeds brown, dwarf; pods
medium size and nearly round; good crop. First pods ready
April 14.
33. Swabian Forcing (Benary).—Seeds_ speckled, very
dwarf; pods medium size; good crop. First pods ready April 8.
34, Smythe’s Hybrid (J. Veitch & Sons).—Seeds black,
dwarf; pods medium size; moderate crop. First pods ready
April 14.
35. Wax Gate (Benary).—Seeds stone colour, moderately
dwarf; pods medium size; heavy crop. First pods ready April
19.
36. Wax Dwarf Digoin (Vilmorin). Seeds pale pink, dwarf;
pods medium size, yellow; goodcrop. First pods ready April 3.
REPORT ON STRAWBERRIES GROWN ‘AT CHISWICK
1897.
With the object of proving the value and characteristics of
the varieties of Strawberries on trial, the Fruit and Vegetable
Committee decided to test them both the first and second year otf
fruiting. Most of the stocks examined were planted August 29,
1895, and inspected for the first time on June 15, 1896 (see
JOURNAL, Vol. XX., Part I., page 71), and for the second time on
July 1, 1897. The colour and shape of the fruit of each variety
will be found in the Report above mentioned in Vol. XX.
142 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
In addition to the stocks planted in 1895, fourteen new
varieties were planted in the autumn of 1896 and spring of 1897,
but, owing to the late date on which many of the plants were
received, the majority of these fresh varieties were not in a
condition to be properly judged in 1897.
It should be borne in mind that probably no fruit varies
more than Strawberries, both in different seasons and on
different soils. The following notes refer only to Chiswick soil
and the seasons of 1896 and 1897.
F.C.C.=First Class Certificate.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
x x xX =Highly Commended.
1. Aberdeen Late (Bunyard).—Moderate crop first and
second year, quality poor both years. Ripe June 5, 1896, and on
June 16, 1897.
2. Acquisition (Laxton). x x x 1896.—Immense crop first
and second year, quality poor each year. Ripe June 8, 1896, and
on June 16, 1897.
8. Admiral (Laxton).—A promising new variety sent in the
autumn of 1896. Sufficient fruit was not produced to form a
decided opinion on its merits.
4. Auguste Boisselot. ¥F.C.C. 1890.—Good crop the first
year, much heavier the second, quality excellent. The fruit
seems to melt away in the mouth. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on
June 16, 1897.
5. Bridehaugh (McDougal).—Fair crop the first year and
poor the second, flavour good. Many of the plants died the
second year. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 17, 1897.
6. British Queen.—Moderate crop the first year, much
heavier and better in every respect the second year ; well known
for its fine quality. Ripe June 15, 1896, and on June 17,
1897.
7. Bonny Lass.—Light crop the first season, but very
productive the second year, quality good. Ripe June 11, 1896,
and on June 18, 1897.
8. Boule d’Or.—Moderate crop first and second year, quality
poor; not worth growing. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 16,
1897.
9. Bothwell Bank.—Same as President.
10. Countess. F.C.C. 1896.—Splendid crop first and second
REPORT ON STRAWBERRIES GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 143
year, flavour delicious. A very fine variety with a wonderful
aroma. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 18, 1897.
11. Crown Prince.—Poor crop each year; not worth
growing.
12. Dr. Morse.—Very light crop each year, habit weak; not
worth growing.
13 & 14. Dr. Vieillard (Vilmorin, Laxton).—Moderate crop
first year, improving the second, quality poor. Ripe June 5,
1896, and on June 16, 1897.
15. Duc de Magenta.—An inferior form of British Queen.
Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 18, 1897.
16. Duc de Malakoff.—Moderate crop first and second
year, quality good. Ripe June 15, 1896, and on June 18,
1897.
17. Duke of Edinburgh.—Poor crop each year, quality poor ;
not worth growing. There are two varieties under this name,
this one is Roden’s variety.
18. Edouard Lefort (Vilmorin, Letellier). F.C.C. 1896.—
Splendid crop first and second year, flavour delicious. Ripe June
11, 1896, and on June 17, 1897.
19. General McMahon (McDougall).—Light crop first and
second year, habit very weak; scarcely worth growing. Ripe
June 11, 1896, and on June 17, 1897.
20. George Lesueur.—Heavy crop first and second year,
quality not good the first year, but excellent the second. Ripe
June 11, 1896, and on June 17, 1897.
21. George Wythes (Laxton).—A promising new variety sent
in the autumn of 1896. Crop too light to judge accurately as to
its merits.
22. Hautbois.—Good crop the first year, poor crop the
second. Succeeds best from young plants.
23. Hammonia.—A failure first and second year. Weak
habit ; not worth growing.
24, John Ruskin.—Moderate crop first and second year,
quality poor. Ripe June 8, 1896, and on June 14, 1897.
25. Jennings’ White.—Light crop first and second year,
quality poor; not worth growing.
26. Kimberley (Bunyard).—Practically a failure each year ;
not worth growing.
27. Latest of All (Laxton). F.0.C. 1894.—Very heavy crop
144 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
first and second year, flavour better the second year. Ripe June
15, 1896, and on June 17, 1897. .
28. Leader (Laxton). F.C.C. 1895.—Heavy crop of immense
berries first and second year, quality poor. Ripe June 11, 1896,
and June 16, 1897.
29. Martha Nicaise.—Good crop first year, not so good the
second, nor so good in flavour. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on
June 17, 1897.
30. Mentmufe (liaxton). A.M. 1897.—A new variety from
Noble, crossed with British Queen. Not in condition at Chiswick
for examination the first year, 1897.
81. Monarch (Laxton). F.C.C. 1895.—Heavy crop first and
second year, quality good. Ripe June 10, 1896, and on June
16, 1897.
82. Mrs. Farr (Farr).—A sport from President with varie-
gated foliage. Received late.
33. Newton’s Seedling. x x x 1896.—Splendid crop first
and second year, a fine late variety, quality excellent. Ripe
June 15, 1896, and on June 20, 1897.
84. Pauline.—Crop very light first and second year; not
worth growing.
85. Pioneer. F.C.C. 1896.—Light crop first year, heavy the
second, and greatly improved. Ripe June 10, 1896, and on
June 17, 1897.
36. President. x x x 1896.—Heavy crop first and second
year, quality very good. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 16,
1897.
37. Prince Teck.—Moderate crop first year, improving the
second year, quality excellent. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on
June 17, 1897.
38. Prince of Wales (Carmichael).—No crop, plants re-
ceived late.
39. Princess of Wales (Carmichael).—No crop, plants re-
ceived late.
40. Princess Royal (Vilmorin). x x x 1896.—Moderate to
heavy crop first year, not so good the second; many of the
flowers were blind; quality very good. Ripe June 11, 1896, and
on June 17, 1897.
41. Queen of Denmark (Carmichael).—No crop, plants re-
ceived late.
REPORT ON STRAWBERRIES GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 145
42. Reeve’s Eclipse—Moderate crop first year, very light the
second, quality very poor; scarcely worth growing.
43. Reward (Laxton).—Not sufficient fruit to decide on its
merits, 1897.
44, Royal Sovereign (Laxton). F.C.C. 1892.—Grand crop
first and second year, quality good. This variety was the only
one not injured by the May frosts in 1897, and was also the
earliest variety. Ripe June 4, 1896, and on June 10, 1897.
45. Souvenir de Bossuet (Vilmorin).—Good erop first and
second year, quality fair. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 17,
1897.
46. Sir Charles Napier.—Heavy crop first and second year,
quality good. This variety has the defect of many of the plants
dying and leaving blanks in the rows. Ripe June 10, 1896,
and on June 17, 1897.
47. Thomas Carlyle (Fraser).—Not sufficient fruit to test its
merits, 1897.
48. Thomas Laxton (Laxton).—Not sufficient fruit to test its
merits, 1897.
49. Trafalgar (Laxton).—Not sufficient fruit to test its
merits, 1897.
50. Triomphe de Paris.—Light crop first year, very heavy
the second, quality fair. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 16,
1897.
51. Trollope’s Victoria (Bunyard).—A failure first and second
year. .
52. Unnamed variety (Letellier)—A large white-fruited
variety, but not sufficient fruit to test its merits.
58. Veitch’s Perfection (J. Veitch). F.0.0. 1896.—Owing to
the plants being received late this variety was not in condition
in 1897, but judging from the fruit shown at Chiswick in 1896,
and at Westminster in 1897, it should prove a grand acquisition.
54. Wilson’s Improved.—Light crop first and second year,
quality good, but scarcely worth growing.
55. White Knight.—Light bearer first and second year,
quality fairly good. Ripe June 11, 1896, and on June 18, 1897.
56. Wonderful (Bunyard). A.M. 1897.—Good crop first year,
very heavy second, quality excellent. Ripe June 11, 1896, and
on June 17, 1897.
146 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
MINvuTE OF CouNctIL, adopted April 18, 1897.
APPLES, PEARS, AND PLUMS.
(A) For DEssERT, (B) FOR COOKING.
With a view to removing difficulties and resolving doubts
as to the distinction to be drawn between dessert and kitchen
apples, pears, and plums, the Council of the Royal Horticultural
Society have caused the following lists to be prepared for the
suidance of their Judges at the Society’s Exhibitions and Shows. |
The Council fully recognise that the line of separation
between dessert and kitchen fruits must be entirely arbitrary,
and to a great extent a matter of taste—which differs widely.
They do not, therefore, wish it to be supposed that the varieties
named in the one list are unfit for usein the other. Hveryoneis
at liberty to use a variety for any purpose he likes, but in their
opinion a fixed line of division between the two classes, for
exhibition purposes, is absolutely necessary to secure uni-
formity, and avoid confusion and disappointment at their
Shows.
The Council are also fully aware that some varieties of
beautiful appearance, which do not in their opinion come up to
dessert standard as regards flavour, are often placed on the
dessert table. Everyone is at liberty to ornament his table
with brightly coloured fruits as well as with beautiful flowers ;
but beauty in fruits, although a great additional advantage when
it accompanies flavour and quality, does not, when standing
alone, entitle a variety to rank in the technical exhibition sense
as a dessert fruit.
It would be impossible to draw up lists to which everyone
would agree as to the position assigned to each individual variety,
and it is only by mutual concessions that a general working
agreement can be reached ; but that it is a good thing to endeavour
to bring about such agreement the Council have no doubt what-
ever.
The following list will be found to include the great majority
of varieties at present shown for exhibition. In the case of those
not named herein the Judges must decide for themselves in
which class they will put them, always bearing in mind the
principles expressed in the preceding paragraphs. Judges are
APPLES, PEARS, AND PLUMS. 147
requested, in the case of any variety of sterling merit, omitted
here, coming to their notice, to notify their action to the Secre-
tary of the Royal Horticultural Society with a view to future
revision of the lists.
The object of the following lists should be borne in mind.
It is only to decide between dessert and cooking varieties. It is
in no sense to recommend any, much less all those mentioned,
as being desirable varieties to plant. Such advice must be
sought elsewhere and not here.
The nomenclature follows the 5th Edition, 1884, of the late
Dr. Hogg’s Fruit Manual.
APPLES.
Dessert.
Adam’s Pearmain.
Akera, or Okera.
Allen’s Everlasting.
Allington Pippin.
American Mother.
Ashmead’s Kernel.
Baumann’s Winter Reinette.
Beauty of Bath.
Benoni.
Blenheim Pippin.
Blue Pearmain.
Boston Russet.
Braddick’s Nonpareil.
Brownlees’ Russet.
Calville Rouge Précoce.
Cardinal, or Peter the Great.
Claygate Pearmain.
Cobham.
Cockle’s Pippin.
Cornish Aromatic.
Cornish Gilliflower.
Court Pendu Plat.
Court of Wick.
Cox’s Orange.
D’Arcy Spice.
Devonshire Quarrenden.
Duchess’ Favourite.
Cooking.
Albury Park Nonesuch.
Alfriston.
Annie Elizabeth.
Beauty of Kent.
Beauty of Stoke.
Bedfordshire Foundling.
Belle de Pontoise.
Bess Pool.
Betty Geeson.
Bietigheimer Red.
Bismarck.
Bowhill Pippin.
Bramley’s Seedling.
Byford Wonder.
Castle Major.
Cellini.
Chelmsford Wonder.
Cox’s Pomona.
Domino.
Duchess of Oldenburg.
Dumelow’s Seedling Welling-
ton, or Normanton Wonder.
Dutch Codlin.
Karly Julyan.
Karly Rivers.
Keklinville.
Emperor Alexander.
148 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Dessert.
Duke of Devonshire.
Dutch Mignonne.
Karly Peach.
Egremont Russet.
Fearn’s Pippin.
Gascoyne’s Scarlet.
Golden Reinette.
Gravenstein.
Herefordshire Pearmain.
Hubbard’s Pearmain.
Irish Peach.
Joaneting.
Keddleston Pippin.
Kentish Pippin, or Colonel
Vaughan’s.
Kerry Pippin.
King Harry.
King of Tomkins County.
King of the, Pippins.
Lady Sudeley.
Lord Burghley.
Mabbott’s Pearmain.
Mannington’s Pearmain.
Margaret, or Red Juneating.
Margil.
May Queen.
Melon Apple.
Mr. Gladstone.
Northern Spy.
Old Nonpareil.
Oslin.
Red Astrachan.
Reinette de Canada.
Ribston Pippin. :
Rosemary Russet.
Ross Nonpareil.
Roundway Magnum Bonum.
Scarlet Nonpareil.
September Beauty.
Cooking.
Forester.
Frogmore Prolific.
Galloway Pippin.
Gloria Mundi.
Gold Medal, or Crystal Palace.
Golden Noble.
Golden Spire.
Gooseberry.
Gospatric.
Grantonian.
Greenup’s Pippin, Yorkshire
Beauty, or Counsellor.
Grenadier.
Hambledon Deux Ans.
Hambling’s Seedling.
Hoary Morning.
Hormead Pearmain.
Hawthornden, New.
Hollandbury.
Keswick Codlin.
Lady Henniker.
Lane’s Prince Albert.
Lord Derby.
Lord Grosvenor.
Lord Suffield.
Maltster.
Manks Codlin.
Mére de Ménage.
Mrs. Barron.
Newton Wonder.
New Northern Greening.
Northern Dumpling.
Peasgood’s Nonesuch. |
Potts’ Seedling.
Rivers’ Codlin.
Royal Jubilee.
Rymer.
Sandringham.
Sanspareil.
APPLES, PEARS, AND PLUMS. 149
Dessert. Cooking.
Sturmer Pippin. Schoolmaster.
St. Edmund’s Pippin. Seaton House.
Washington. Small’s Admirable.
Wealthy. Spencer’s Favourite, or Queen
White Transparent. Caroline.
Williams’ Favourite. Stirling Castle.
Worcester Pearmain. Stone’s, or Loddington.
Wyken Pippin. Striped Beefing.
Yellow Ingestrie. The Queen.
Tibbett’s Pearmain.
Tower of Glammis.
Twenty Ounce.
Tyler’s Kernel.
Wadhurst Pippin.
Wagener.
Waltham Abbey Seedling.
Warner’s King.
Winter Quoining, or Queening.
PEARS.
It will be sufficient to say that the following do not rank for
HKixhibition as Dessert Pears at the Society’s Shows :—
Bellissime d’Hiver. King Edward.
Beurré Clairgeau. Morel.
Black Worcester. Poire d’Auch.
Catillac. Summer Compote.
Directeur Alphand. Triomphe de Jodgoine.
Duchesse de Mouchy. Uvedale’s St. Germain.
Gilogil. Verulam.
Grosse Calebasee. Vicar of Winkfield.
Idaho.
PLUMS.
All plums can, if not otherwise required, be advantageously
used for cooking, especially if they are not fully ripe; but this
does not constitute them cooking varieties in the technical
exhibition sense. Similarly, some cooking Plums, e.g., Blue
Impératrice, if left to hang on the tree until they are shrivelled,
become fit for dessert, as far as flavour is concerned; but this
150 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
does not render them dessert varieties from an exhibition point
of view :—
Dessert.
Angelina Burdett.
Anna Spith.
Boulouf.
Coe’s Golden Drop.
Coe’s Violet.
De Montfort.
Denniston’s Superb.
Early Favourite.
Gages, all varieties.
Golden Esperen.
Ickworth Impératrice.
Impérial de Milan.
Jefferson.
Kirke’s.
Oullins Golden.
Précoce de Tours.
Purple Gages, all varieties.
Reine Claude, all varieties.
St. Etienne.
Transparent, all varieties.
Washington.
Cooking.
Archduke.
Automne Compdéte.
Belgian Purple.
Belle de Louvain.
Belle de Septembre.
Curlew.
Cox’s Emperor.
Diamond.
Duke of Edinburgh.
Karly Normandy.
Karly Prolific.
Gisborne’s. :
Goliath.
Grand Duke.
Heron.
Impératrice, Blue and White.
Magnum Bonum, Red and
White. \
Mitchelson’s.
Monarch.
Orleans, all varieties.
Pershore.
Pond’s Seedling.
Prince Engelbert.
Prince of Wales.
Sultan.
The Czar.
Victoria.
Wyedale.
Minute or Counctt adopted April 13, 1897.
The Council of the R.H.S. wish to remind exhibitors at the
Drill Hall meetings that the object for which the various
committees of the Society were constituted, and the bi-monthly
meetings held, was to allow of any new or rare flower or fruit,
which might be in perfection at a time when no exhibition was
being held, being submitted toa body of experts for adjudication.
MINUTE OF COUNCIL ADOPTED APRIL 13, 1897. 151
By degrees a practice has grown up of groups of plants and
collections of fruits being also sent by exhibitors, such plants
and fruits being frequently neither new nor rare, and these
groups and collections have become so large and frequently so
_ numerous that there is danger of the more important work of
the committees being lost sight of.
The Council, whilst grateful for the consistent support the
Society has received from exhibitors, and desirous of offering
every encouragement to them and of seeing the Drill Hall always
well filled, feel that the time has arrived when some limit must
be put to the size of the groups and collections. They have
therefore drawn up the following rules which they have directed
the Superintendent to strictly adhere to :—
I. Exhibitors at the Drill Hall of groups and collections must
give notice to the Secretary, R.H.S., 117 Victoria Street,
Westminster, not later than the Friday before, of their
desire to exhibit, and must, at the same time, state the
nature of their proposed exhibit, and how much space it
will occupy: this must in no case exceed 100 square
feet.
II. Exhibits entered separately for the separate committees
will be considered distinct, but not more than 100 square
feet of table space can be allowed for each; that is to
say, an exhibitor may stage 100 feet of fruit, 100 feet of
orchids, and 100 feet of Floral Committee plants and
flowers; but each group must be separately staged and
consist exclusively of fruit, orchids, and hardy or tender
plants or flowers respectively—not mixed together,
excepting only that small decorative foliage plants may
be used amongst orchids and fruit, if desired.
III. The limit of 100 square feet does not apply to large plants
placed on the floor; special arrangements should be
made beforehand for such plants with the Superintendent.
IV. No alteration is proposed in the existing rules with
reference to the exhibition of new or rare plants, flowers,
or fruits for the Society’s Certificates and Awards of
Merit. By Order of Council,
W. WILKS, Secretary.
117 Victoria Street, Westminster.
N.B.—Should at any time the entries of groups be so
numerous as not to allow of all being staged in their entirety,
the exhibitors will be informed how much less space than that
they have applied for can be placed at their disposal.
152 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
SOME TRIALS PROPOSED AT CHISWICK, 1898.
Fuchsias for greenhouse decoration.—Two plants of each variety
should be sent early in the spring addressed to the Superin-
tendent, Royal Horticultural Society’s Gardens, Chiswick.
Pentstemons for border plants.—Two plants of each variety or a
small packet of seed should be sent as above very early in
spring.
Saxifrages for rockwork and borders.—Two plants of each variety
should be sent as above during the early autumn of 1897.
Spireas, shrubby species for hardy border plants.—Two plants
of each variety should be sent as above in the autumn of
1897.
Violas.—Six plants should be sent as above in October, 1897.
New Cannas.—One plant of each should be sent as above on or
before February 1.
Onions.—Seed should be sent as above at once for testing
autumn-sown varieties.
Potatos.—20 tubers of each variety to be sent as above by Feb-
ruary 1, 1898.
Peas.—New varieties only. Seed,should be sent as above on or
before February 1, 1898.
Tomatos.—New varieties only. Seed should be sent as above in
January, 1898.
Radishes.—Seeds should be sent as above in January, 1898.
QUANTITIES OF SEEDS, &c., TO BE SENT, WHEN
REQUIRED, FOR TRIAL AT CHISWICK. |
Peas, Broad Beans, Dwarf Beans, Scarlet Runner Beans.—Half
a pint of seed of each variety.
Cabbages, Kales, Cauliflowers, Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Savoys,
Carrots, Celery, Beet, Parsnip, Turnip, Leeks, Lettuce,
Onions, Radish, Parsley.—Half an ounce of each.
Potatos.—20 tubers of each variety.
Tomatos.—25 seeds of each variety.
Cucumbers, Gourds, Marrows.—Six seeds of each variety.
Strawberries.—20 runners of each.
New Fruits, &c., one or two trees, plants, or bushes of each.
Flower Seeds.—Sufficient of each variety to ensure a fair trial.
JOURNAL
OF THE
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
VOL, .% 50. 1657.
Part II.
MUTUAL ACCOMMODATIONS BETWEEN PLANT
ORGANS: OR THE STUDY OF HOMOLOGY AND
ANALOGY.
By the Rev. GrorcE Henstow, M.A., V.M.H., F.L.S., &e.
[Read July 13, 1897.]
Mr. H. Spencer and Darwin are to be credited with the honour
of having presented the great doctrine of evolution, or the
development of all kinds of animals and plants from pre-existing
races, respectively, in an acceptable ight to English readers.
Iivery one knew that individuals were evolved or developed,
because it is a self-evident fact that an egg, for example, can
preduce a bird or reptile. It is obvious that no being ever
comes into existence full grown. Yet this was the old idea as
to the first originals of all animals and plants; as Milton’s
imagination has so graphically described them in his “ Paradise
Lost.” * We now know that the laws which are true for the
* In the first chapter of Genesis attention should be paid to the repeated
phrase ‘“‘ Let the earth put forth grass,” “ Let the waters bring forth,” Xe.
The words appear to indicate secondary agencies or evolutionary processes.
B
154 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
origin and development of the individual are equally true for the
race.
When we look for some common and immediate source of
the processes of development, whether in an individual or the
race, we find it to reside in living protoplasm. This complex
substance, together with its still more complicated nucleus, is the
seat of all change in living structures. No one knows how it
is done, but we readily see the effect; so that just as the
different parts or organs of a bird or reptile are formed out of
one and the same protoplasmic substances in the egg, so is it
in plants. Their organs are developed out of a common or
embryonic tissue. Out of this, by means of the protoplasm or
“ physical basis of life,’ as Huxley called it, all the organs of a
plant can arise.
This formative tissue, as a rule, always develops the same
organs in the right places ; nevertheless, it seems rarely to quite
lose the power of forming others, if it be necessary, in the place
of the usual organs.
It is convenient to classify plant-organs as axes and append-
ages; the former being roots, stems, and branches, while the
latter are the various structures which grow out of them, and
are the so-called “foliar organs’’; such being the leaves,
stipules, leaf-scales, bracts, and the members of the four floral
whorls.
Organs are said to be homologous when they are of the same
fundamental nature (7.e., axis or appendage, as the case may be),
though their functions may be very different. ‘Thus a potato is
homologous with a birch-twig, both being branches from the
stem. But organs having the same functions need not be of the
same nature. Thus the tendril of a pea is an altered leaf
(appendage), while that of a vine is a metamorphosed flowering
branch (axis). They are therefore analogous, in that their uses
are identical; but they are not homologous as to their origins.
Each organ of a plant sustains what may be called its normal
use; but by transformation it may assume other uses, and so
similate analogous organs.
I propose giving a few illustrations only of each organ to
exemplify these facts.
Roors.—Roots and stems aro more or less anatomically
MUTUAL ACCOMMODATIONS BETWEEN PLANT ORGANS, 155
different, but nevertheless they are fundamentally of the same
nature; and though destined for different purposes, they can
both alike acquire the same functions. Thus roots normally fix
the plant into the ground and supply it with mineral matters in
solution, and with water. They may, however, become thick and
fleshy, and act as reservoirs of nutriment for future use, as in
biennial carrots and turnips, and the “tuberous roots’”’ of the
dahlia. Occasionally, if they lie near the surface, or are
accidentally exposed to light, they can take on one of the
functions of stems, and produce leafy branches, as may be seen
in elms in a hedgerow; the hedge being often entirely composed
of elm-saplings. The roots of plums and raspberries are par-
ticularly prone to throw up young plants, suggesting the hint
that to propagate any plant by its roots they should be raised
towards the surface of the ground or exposed. Roots may
adhere to those of other plants, and become parasitic, as in
broomrapes; and if exposed to light may turn green, and
become assimilative organs, as in some orchids.
Stems.—These are usually the aérial structures of support,
and normally convey the fluids from the roots to the leaves.
Many, however, are partly subterranean, as mints, and then they
anatomically approximate the structure of a true root. If, e.,
a living aérial branch be buried, as it continues to elongate, its
tissues at once commence to resemble those of a normally
subterranean stem, which is intermediate in structure between
an aérial stem and a root. Conversely if the underground shoot
of a potato reach the surface, instead of forming a tuber it grows
up into an erect stem and leafy branches. But if a potato is
entirely prevented from forming tubers, the tendency to do so is
so strong throughout the plant that it now forms them in the
axils of the leaves; proving the homologous nature between an
ordinary aérial branch and a subterranean tuber.
As stems (unlike most roots) normally produce buds, it is not
surprising to find subterranean stems and others upon the
surface of the ground perpetually propagating the plant by
means of them, as convolvulus and coltsfoot underground, and
strawberries, houseleek, &c., upon the surface.
That stems can produce roots, even more readily than roots
can produce buds, is known to all gardeners who propagate
B2
156 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
by cuttings; and what they do artificially is often followed by
Nature, as in blackberries, periwinkles, laurel-boughs, &c., when-
ever they reach and rest upon moist ground. Figs, such as the
banyan, send down aérial roots, which strike into the soil and
thence act as stems for support, but as roots for supplying
nutriment. This use might be similated in vines when of great
extent—viz., by either encouraging aérial roots to reach the
ground, or by bending a branch to the soil and making if strike
root init. It would thus aid the extremities of the vine, as has,
indeed, been done with such admirable effect lately in the long
Gros Colmar House at Chiswick (fig. 84).
RY iia
/, WY,
Hee :
SA\y :
AN
SD
! eh AS
i
San, q re
~~ a -
FY Fj,
s.\\ 5—
NO VO RAT,
in@e wae ns
ly, ue
TZ \
ve ] AY
Fic. 34.—Vinz Brancu Bent ann Srrvcx. (Journal of Horticulture.
Another use of a stem, if weak, is the climbing up other
plants so as to reach the light and air above. Plants do this in
many ways and by different organs—e.g., by a spirally climbing
stem (hop), by conversion of branches into tendrils (vine and
Virginia creeper), &c. That it is not impossible for even @ zoos
todo this, Nature gives us the exception in Dissocheta, just to
prove the rule; for the rootlets of this plant can become sensitive
———————
MUTUAL ACCOMMODATIONS BETWEEN PLANT ORGANS, 157.
and tendril-like. In other methods of climbing, stems are more *
analogous to foliar climbers.
While green foliar organs are normally concerned with
assimilation, any green stem can assimilate as well, and in
some cases all foliar appendages are completely arrested, the
stem entirely replacing them, as in cacti, euphorbias, and
stapelias. These three groups, moreover, strongly mimic one
another in their forms, since by growing under similar arid
conditions they have acquired a similar outward physiognomy.
Lastly, just as roots can become parasitic, so can stems, as in
Cuscuta or dodder, which fixes itself to branches of clover,
furze, &c., and then lives upon the juices of the host-plant.
StrputEes.—These, as is shown by the origin of their fibro-
vascular cords, are really parts of the leaf to which they belong.
They assume a variety of forms and uses. Thus, they are
foliaceous in the pea and Galiwm, compensating for the loss of the
leaflets in the former plant; these latter organs assuming the
structure and use of tendrils. They may be spinescent (acacias),
or like scarious bracts, protecting the buds from excessive heat in
some desert plants (Polycarpon), or they may constitute bud.
scales (lime, elm, oak, &c.).
Leaves.—The normal function of the blades of these im-
portant organs is, of course, assimilation, but it can be assumed
by the petiole (acacias) and by any of the other foliar appendages,
provided they be green—e.g., stipules (pea), bracts (hellebore),
calyx and pistil of most flowers.
Since protoplasm pervades every part of a plant, we can
understand the possibility, though without explaining the
immediate causes, that leaves can give rise to buds and roots
and so propagate the plant. This is normally done in many
cases, as in ferns, Bryophyllum, Cardamine, &c.; while the
gardener makes great use of this property in gloxinias, begonias,
&ec.
As stems can climb, so do leaves, either by aid of the sensi-
tiveness in petioles (Clematis), by the apex of the blade (Gloriosa),
or by the conversion of leaflets (partly) into tendrils (pea), and in
Lathyrus Aphaca (entirely).
The remarkable feature of the leaves of certain plants in
158 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
catching insects, as Saracenia, Drosera, Pinguicula, Nepenthes,
&e., which are scattered over the vegetable kingdom and possess
no immediate affinities between them, shows that this power of
digestion of nitrogenous food is a general one—as, indeed, is
normally effected on the germination of seeds and sprouting of
tubers when the solid reserve food-materials are dissolved and
assimilated—but the insectivorous habit has become developed in
some unknown way in particular groups of plants only, or in
isolated members of families. Saracenia and Nepenthes, it may
be observed, are cases of analogy, as the former is a metamor-
phosed leaf-blade, the latter, according to Sir J. D. Hooker, an
altered water-gland situated at the extreme tip of the blade only.
LEAF-SCALES.—Arrested forms of leaves, called bud-scales,
appear on subterranean bulbs, as of lilies. These act as store-
houses of nutriment, and become analogous with tubers and
fleshy roots. They can also be formed aérially (L. bulbiferwm).
In other cases they act as protectors to the young growths within
the autumn-formed leaf-buds. In these it is usually the petiole
only which expands without the blade (horse-chestnut, currant,
ash), or else the stipules form bud-scales, the true leaf taking no
part whatever (lime, elm, oak, &c.).
Bracts.—Leaves again become scale-like when the repro-
ductive organs are developed. They are then called bracts.
These may be green and formed out of the petiole only (hellebore),
or blade only (ranunculus). They may be coloured and petaloid,
and so add to the attraction of the flowers (everlastings, some
Aroidee@, some salvias, &c.). In other cases they mimic a flower
by their regular form and whorled character (Cornus, Darwima,
Euphorbia Jacquinifolia).
Frorat Wxortus.—lt has long been an established fact that
all the members of flowers are metamorphosed leaves, or rather
homologous with leaves; and while transitions from one kind to
another are normal in some few cases, it is a common thing for
one organ to assume more or less perfectly the form of another
in abnormal or monstrous conditions.
The changes may be metaphorically described as ‘‘pro-
gressive’? and “ retrogressive,’’ as the parts of any outer whorl
MUTUAL ACCOMMODATIONS BETWEEN PLANT ORGANS, 159
assume the characters of an inner one, or vice versd, respectively,
A few illustrations will explain this.
In Hydrangea and Fuchsia the calyx is normally petaloid,
but in the “ cup-and-saucer’”’ campanulas, and ‘ hose-in-hose ”’
Mimulus, the calyx has abnormally acquired all the features of a
corolla. In water-lilies the transition between petals and stamens
is normally characteristic, while in a monstrous foxglove I once
noticed the corolla was split up into stamens. In the “rogues”’
among wall-flowers, and in poppies and oranges, the stameng
often become abortive carpels, while begonias are particularly
liable to produce all sorts of mixtures between staminate and
pistillate structures.
Retrogression is seen in carpels and ovules becoming more
or less of a staminate character, as in willows, and in roses, &e.,
described by Dr. Masters in his “‘ Teratology.’’ Sometimes ovules
become petals, as is not infrequent in lady’s smock (Cardamine
pratensis), and in a rhododendron received from Mr. Veitch.
Sometimes they become foliaceous, as in a mignonette described
by the late Professor J.S. Henslow. Stamens, as well as carpels,
turn into petals, as in complete double flowers, and then become
multiplied. A further retrogression is seen in their becoming
foliaceous, as the pistil of the double cherry, the green rose, the
alpine strawberry, &c. In forms of primroses, the corolla alone,
or the sepals only, may turn into leaves. Since it thus appears
that all the organs of a flower are but leaves in another form, a
flower-bud is therefore homologous with a leaf-bud; and as the
latter can develop into an elongated branch with leaves, or else
assume the abbreviated form with leaf-scales, as of a bulb, so can
a flower-bud become replaced by either one or the other; the
axis not infrequently elongating in roses, or forming bulbils in
place of flowers in onions.
Lastly, minute bracts, as of plantains, may grow out into
true leaves, thereby revealing their homology. The general
practical result issuing out of these phenomena, is that if Nature
shows any sign of departure from the normal structure of an
organ in a flower or elsewhere, the horticulturist has it in his
power to encourage the change, and, it may be, ultimately to fix
it if it be desirable to do so. Thus the whole of the balsameflora
section of the E. I. Rhododendrons raised by Mr. J. Heal for
Messrs. Veitch were secured by his detecting a slightly petaloid
160 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
anther in one flower. He fertilised the pistil with the pollen of
the same flower. From this fifteen double and semi-double
offspring were obtained ; and so he laid the foundation of that
admirable section of greenhouse rhododendrons.
Again the principle of homology shows that, protoplasm being
common to all parts of the plant, any one part, if in an active
state of growth—z.c., still with embryonic tissue—may be utilised
for propagating purposes, since any fragment carries within itself,
potentially, the whole plant. Hence arises the ease in multiplying
any variety; while to perpetuate and fix a variety, constancy in
the external conditions should be maintained as well as self-
fertilisation of the flowers. On the other hand, if diversity be
looked for and new varieties desired, as much difference as can
be obtained in the nature of the environment as possible should
be secured, and the intercrossing of distinct races and species
should be practised.
CHISWICK, Jury 14, 1897.
A DESIRE having been expressed by many Fellows of the
Society that a meeting should be held at Chiswick some time
during 1897, the Council decided to invite the members of all
the Committees to lunch with them at the Gardens on
Wednesday, July 14. Invitations were issued accordingly, and
about seventy members, in addition to the Council and officers,
attended on the appointed day.
Having examined the various trials in progress, and noticed
the new glass-houses erected during the last two or three years,
the company sat down to an excellent luncheon, provided by
Messrs. Spiers & Pond. The President, Sir Trevor Lawrence,
Bart., occupied the chair, supported by Sir Joseph Hooker,
G.C.S8.1L, C.B., and the members of the Council.
Kach of the Society’s five Committees was well represented,
there being present ten members of the Scientific Committee,
twenty-one of the Fruit Committee, twenty-two of the Floral
Committee, sixteen of the Orchid Committee, and four of the
Narcissus Committee.
The toast of her Majesty having been duly honoured, the
President rose and gave to all a hearty welcome, expressing his
CHISWICK, JuLy 14. 161
pleasure that so many had been able to attend on the occasion.
He desired to convey the Council’s sincere appreciation of the
services of the different Committees, the members of which go
willingly attended the several meetings for the sole object of
aiding the Society to do all that could be done in the interests of
horticulture. The Scientific, Floral, Orchid, Narcissus, and Fruit
and Vegetable Committees did each in their sections work that
could not be otherwise done so well, as the members possessed
special qualifications, and some of them travelled long distances
to discharge their duties without fear orfavour. They gave their
time freely, and not without cost to themselves, solely to advance
the art in which all were interested, and in a spirit of good-will
to the Royal Horticultural Society.
At three o’clock, the luncheon tables having been cleared
away, the President again took the chair, and Dr. Maxwell T.
Masters, F'.R.S., delivered an address on the better utilisation of
the Society’s Gardens, entitled,
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ?
[In the following notes is embodied the substance of an
address on “ Suggestions for the better utilisation of Chiswick
Gardens,’”’ by Dr. Maxwell T. Masters, F.R.S., &c., which at the
request of the Council was delivered at the meeting of the
committees at Chiswick on Wednesday, July 14, 1897. In
sending the following paper Dr. Masters says: “In writing
out these notes the subject has here and there been slightly
expanded, and matters are herein alluded to for the men-
tion of which in a spoken address the time was not sufficient.
Purely cultural matters have been passed over in the hope that
some competent authority may favour the Society with some
observation on the development of the garden from the point of
view of the cultivator.’’]
In considering the best means for “the development and
further utilisation of the Chiswick Gardens’’—a subject which
the Council honoured me by requesting me to introduce—in
the first place, the meeting of all the committees here to-day
may be adduced as one illustration of what was desired; and
in thanking the Council I only express the gratitude felt by
162 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
all the members of the committees for this opportunity of
meeting. Nothing could have furnished a clearer proof of the
hold that Chiswick has upor the minds of horticulturists.
The traditions of the past are indeed glorious. Think of the
multitude of plants introduced by Douglas, Hartweg, and
other collectors, grown, described, illustrated and distributed
from these gardens. ‘Think of the work of Lindley, crystal-
lised and enshrined, so far as gardening is concerned, in his
“Theory of Horticulture,’ which had its origin here in these
gardens. Recall the careful and accurate labours of Robert
Thomson in the department not only of pomology but of
meteorology. Let us not overlook the labours of Gordon among
conifers, nor bury in oblivion the earlier labours of Sabine, of
Bentham, and many others recorded in our Transactions and
Proceedings.
Coming to more recent times, we may surely advert with
satisfaction to the various ‘‘ conferences,’ many of which have
been held within these gardens. Speaking generally it may be
asserted, without fear of contradiction, that by no other means has
so much and such trustworthy information on the particular
subjects concerned been brought together and put at the disposal
of the public as by these meetings and exhibitions. As a few
illustrations take the Apple conference, the Rose conference,
the Chrysanthemum conference, the Conifer conference, and
others. Fortunately the records of these meetings are given
in our Journal, but writers and speakers seem now and then
to ignore them, and require to be reminded of their great value
as store-houses of facts. Does it not even seem as if the
Council under-estimated the exceeding value of these meetings ?
It cannot really be so, of course, but the fact remains that
the conferences have of late been abandoned and one reason
for visiting Chiswick thus annulled. If this abolition be due
to the fact that financially these meetings were not success-
ful, it may be urged that such meetings should not be judged
according to an immediate financial standard. The results are
to be looked for in the advancement of horticulture and the
increased reputation of the Society. Surely such objects as
these “ will pay” in the long run if not immediately. There is
no need or desire to disparage the ordinary flower-shows ; they
have their value as outward and visible signs of skill, labour
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ? 163
enterprise ; they encourage the gardener, stimulate the amateur,
and please the public. Moreover, if successful, they help to fill
the coffers of the Society and are regarded with corresponding
favour by our treasurer. But as a means of collecting, and
of diffusing knowledge among practical horticulturists, they
fall far short of the conferences just mentioned. Moreover,
they do little to improve upon those routine or rule of thumb
procedures which were as well if not better carried out by our
predecessors.
In considering the means, therefore, by which the utility of
Chiswick may be enhanced it may be pleaded that at least one
such conference be held annually in these gardens, and that as
many definite opportunities as possible should be afforded to the
Fellows of meeting within this truly time-honoured enclosure.
In these busy days when every man’s time is fully occupied, it is
of no use to say “‘ the gardens are open daily.” Unless there is a
special reason for doing so, few of us can find, or make, the time
to make the journey to ActonGreen. As it is, the Committees
do pay occasional visits to the garden for the purpose of
inspecting the plants cultivated for trial, and of adjudicating upon
their merits. Some of us at least would be glad of the oppor-
tunity of visiting the garden at the same time. If, without
interfering with the judicial labours of the Committee, some one
could be told off on these occasions to explain the objects of
the trials and to give any incidental information concerning them
the benefit would be great and the interest in the garden
enhanced.
Whilst not disregarding the lessons of the past, although
altered circumstances have to some extent rendered them in-
applicable, we may turn to the present, and devote some con-
sideration to the future.
Of the present it is not necessary to say much. The mantle
of our respected friend Barron has fallen on the shoulders of his
successor Wright—and it fits! We can all see for ourselves
what is being done, and how it is done. Furthermore we are
all agreed that the trials of garden-plants, decorative or
utilitarian, should be carried on with the same impartiality as
heretofore. It may be—it is objected that some of the trials
are necessarily on a much more limited scale than are those
under the control of the great seedsmen and nurserymen in
164 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
their own trial grounds. That is no doubt true, but this defect
is compensated for by the wider choice of objects submitted for
trial, and by the absolute freedom from bias which has charac-
terised the Chiswick trials and won for them the respect of the
horticultural community. The records of these trials are
published in our Journal, but not always with sufficient
promptitude to allow the fullest use to be made of them by
those concerned in commercial transactions. This delay is no
doubt in a great measure unavoidable. One other defect in the
records may be pointed out, as it may readily be remedied. The
plants are of course grown for a special object, phloxes for their
flowers, strawberries for their fruit, and so on. It is therefore
essential that the descriptive notes should be taken of these
special points. But the variation in fruit and flower is almost
invariably accompanied by some corresponding diversity in
habit and foliage and other points, which should be also’
recorded.
These notes on “ habit,” to use the word in its most com-
prehensive sense, are of course not wholly overlooked, but they
require to have more attention paid to them than is at present
done. The scientific value of such notes duly co-ordinated and
classified would eventually be very great, whilst the practical
cultivator of to-day would find them of great use to him in
ascertaining the limits of groups or types, in determining the
extent and direction of variation, in identifying particular
varieties, in suggesting appropriate methods of culture, and even
in furnishing him with hints as to the best method of packing
and of ‘‘ marketing ”’ generally.
Without dwelling longer on the present, of which we can all
judge for ourselves, ve may now turn to the future and, asa
preliminary, ask ourselves with reference to Chiswick, do we
as horticulturists and members of a learned Society get all the
advantages that we ought to get out of our garden, shorn
though it be of its ancient proportions and more or less
exhausted as its naturally poor soil must be by the culture of
many decades? On higher grounds than those concerning
merely personal interests we may ask: ‘‘Are we at Chiswick
doing our duty to horticulture ?’’ These questions have already
been partially answered, and in the affirmative with reference to
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ? 165
the trials; but the answer is only partial, and in some other
respects it is to be feared the response must be in the negative.
Horticulture, if the entire body of thoughtful cultivators
may be so personified—horticulture looks to us—to the Royal
Horticultural Society and to the Council as our representative—
to take the initiative, so far as circumstances will permit, in all
matters concerning the development and welfare of our art. In
considering this phase of the subject and leaving purely cul-
tural details to those more competent to speak with authority,
we may consider the matter of our future development at
Chiswick under the two heads, those of education and of
instruction.
For educational purposes, it may be suggested that Chiswick
should be made as perfect an object-lesson as it is possible to
make it. The days for indiscriminate collections of fruit trees,
vegetables, &c., are gone, and we have not room for them; but
we might have what may be called type-collections, or, rather,
selections of what are generally admitted to be the best races of
vegetables and fruits. These would form a standard of compari-
son of the utmost use in connection with the trials just alluded
to. We do not want in our type collection Messrs. So-and-So’s
** maximum superbum,’’ nor Messrs. Somebody Else’s “ maxi-
mum superbissimum improved.” These may indeed find their
place at the proper time in the trial grounds to ascertain what,
if any, difference there is between them, and how they differ
from the recognised types, but in the permanent educational
plots now under consideration we should look, let us say, for
specimens of the best types of cabbages, savoys, Brussels sprouts,
kails, broccolis, and so forth. Thus the young gardener and
the amateur might at the appropriate season be sure to see
and be able to appraise the value of the most generally useful
varieties. And as for cabbages, so with lettuces, potatoes, tomatoes,
fruit trees, and even florist’s flowers and decorative plants. So
treated, the vegetable and fruit quarters, and the plant-houses,
would be as books of reference containing all that is essential in
orderly arrangement, but not bewildering the student with
countless details. At intervals lectures should be given calling
attention to these variations, and their characteristics and special
uses, with demonstrations as to cultural matters. Needless to
say, the best methods of cultivation, pruning, training, &c., should
166 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
be exemplified in each case according to circumstances. Such
demonstrations would furnish another reason for those occa-
sional meetings at Chiswick, which have been advocated in the
earlier part of this address, and would quickly and easily diffuse
information, which could not be grasped so readily by a student
without such aid.
Together with these object-lessons, provision should be made
for research in the form of trials and experiments on all or any
suitable matter of horticultural interest, such as the practical
value of various manures, the effects of particular methods of
pruning, the value of particular stocks, the efficacy of root-
pruning, and so forth. Experiments with various ‘ sprays ”’ in
the prevention of the attacks of insects or fungi require to be
made with care and discrimination. There can be no doubt as to
their value in particular cases under appropriate conditions, but
it is a question whether our American friends do not attach
too much importance to them as a general panacea, and apply
them when commercially speaking there is no need to do so.
At any rate, one of the questions that might be determined here
in principle, has relation to the practical utility of spraying, to
the best modes of carrying it out for different purposes, in different
cases and in different seasons.
Scattered through Germany, France, and other continental
countries, and especially in the United States, are very numerous
experiment stations, from some of which we might derive some
useful hints. Under this impression application for information
was addressed to Professor Bailey, of Cornell University, whose
answer is here given :—
“ Ithaca, N.Y., May 81, 1897.
‘Dr. Maxwell T. Masters, London, Eng.
‘“My Dear Sir,—Your request for information is at hand,
and in reply I may say that we do not have very large planta
tions of fruit at the University, but carry on investigations in
the large commercial orchards of western New York, of which
there are thousands and thousands of acres. We are especially
concerned in the methods of cultivating and fertilising orchard
lands, in spraying for insects and fungous diseases, determining
the very important questions of self-sterility of flowers, adapta-
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ? 167
bilities of new varieties, the methods of evaporating, marketing,
and similar work.
** At this station we are making a special effort to find out
something about the Japanese plums, and this year we shall
fruit something like fifty varieties. We have already published
two bulletins upon the question.
“J am much interested in your Knglish agitation upon fruit-
growing, and it seems to me that the very thing for your people
to do, is, to send some wide-awake man over here to study the
orchard interests of our country. Iam sure that this is one of
the very few directions in which your English horticulturists can
learn from Americans. This is a side of horticulture which has
been enormously developed in this country.
“Tn nearly all matters we must look to you, especially in
matters pertaining to vegetables and glass-house gardening,
ornamental planting, and the like. It seems to me that there
should be a freer interchange of experiences between the two
countries. I certainly derive very much inspiration and help
from the work of your horticulturists, and want to look in upon
some of their work again during the present summer.
“Tf you want any detailed statement, as to what the stations
of this country are trying to do in fruit-culture, I should be glad
to serve youifI can. Our plantations altogether do not number
ten acres in extent at this place, but we are able to learn a great
deal from that area. We have another experiment station in
this State at Geneva, where it is attempted to keep growing all
the varieties of fruits which will thrive in this climate. Both
our National and State Governments are very liberal in support-
ing these institutions, and there is no question whatever but that
the results have been productive of great commercial good.
Our fruit-growers are energetic, wide awake, progressive and
happy.
“ Yours very truly, L. H. Barney,
“ Professor of Horticulture, Cornell University.”
From Prof. Waugh, of Burlington, Vermont, comes another
letter which gives a good idea of the kind of work done :—
“There are,”’ he says, “ fifty-four agricultural experiment stations
in the United States, 48 of which maintain each an officer in
charge of horticultural experiments. In about 40 cases the
168 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
horticulturist has no other duties; in about 80 cases the horti-
cultural work is prosecuted with some vigour ; and in about 20
cases the horticultural work attains real importance, the horti-
culturist being aided by one, two, or three trained assistants.
Nearly all of these stations are comparatively very young, having
been organised since 1887. The work is not therefore settled in
all of them, and the supply of well-trained men fitted for
scientific investigation along horticultural lines is still consider-
ably below the need. In certain sections there has always been
in operation the notion that men of so-called “ practical ”’
experience would be most likely to secure good results in horti-
cultural experimentation ; but all the experience of a decade is
against that belief. It is seen more clearly each year that pro-
gress is being made only as investigators apply themselves to
fundamental principles ; z.c. to the underlying sciences. Thus
scientific talent of a high order is required to solve the compli-
cated problems in applied science, such as make the study of
plant culture. Indeed, much of the best work has been done for
horticulture by botanists, mycologists, and entomologists, who
make no pretensions to “ practical ’’ training.
“This is well illustrated in the matter of the treatment of
plant diseases. I suppose that the practice of spraying is no-
where better understood or more effectively carried on than in
America; and almost every increment of progress has come from
experiment station work. Mr. Lodeman’s recent book on “ The
Spraying of Plants,” is an excellent index of our knowledge on
this subject and its sources. This line of study in particular
has shown results of incalculable value chiefly through the work
of the mycologists.
“The work of botanically inclined horticulturists, among
whom Professor Bailey, of Cornell University, deserves special
mention, has put our knowledge of classificational pomology on
a scientific and rational basis. The mere record and description
of varieties is now seen to be of very slight permanent value.
The study of groups, and types, and natural relationships; or of
variation, its directions, causes, and limitations, is seen to have a
much deeper significance, a broader application, and a much
higher practical value.
“ Hxperiments in propagation, cultivation, and fertilisation
haye given varying results—sometimes worthless, sometimes
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ? 169
highly valuable—depending on the intelligence with which they
have been planned and executed. Merely as examples of the
multifarious lines of work successfully prosecuted by horticul-
turists, I will mention the following :—Control of flowering
seasons in fruits by mulching, &c.; influence of electric light on
plants ; methods of irrigation ; the necessity of cross-pollination
in various apples, pears, plums, and grapes; the protection of
peach trees against winter freezing; the distribution and eradi-
cation of weeds; the preservation of fruits for market; the
acclimatisation and distribution of many fruits; methods of
pruning and training ; forcing fruits and vegetables, &c., &c.
“The work is yet unorganised and imperfect in many par-
ticulars ; but a fairly general agreement has been reached as to
the experimental methods which give best results. The actual
fruit growers most interested in the work of the experiment
stations, and all those most closely connected with them, feel, I
think, that we shall make still further progress just as fast as we
have investigators thoroughly and broadly trained in the sciences
and capable of pursuing independent, original scientific research,
and as fast as the management of the experiment stations is
taken out of the hands of unworthy politicians, so that such
trained scientists may be employed in place of incapable favour-
ites who still hold a few of these positions.
“HW, A. WAUGH.
“ Burlington, Vermont.”
Turning now to the instructional features that might be
introduced at Chiswick, it may be pointed out that in many of
the experiment stations alluded to in the preceding letters, there
are horticultural schools where a thorough training in the prin-
ciples underlying cultivation is afforded, as well as instruction in
the technical details of plant cultivation. The word training is
employed because dogmatic teaching is in these institutions, as
elsewhere, as far as possible, superseded by practical work. ‘The
student is now expected to verify for himself, so far as circum-
stances will allow, the details and explanations afforded by
lectures and text-books. We have not in this country yet any-
thing that we can put alongside of the horticultural schools
of Versailles, Ghent, Vilvorde, or Berlin ; but a commencement
has been made, and at Chelmsford, under the auspices of the
C
170 - JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Essex County Council, at Swanley, in Edinburgh, are schools
where the principles of horticulture are practically taught, and
where the practice is constantly referred to the principles
underlying it.
If we cannot have such a school at Chiswick, and at present
that seems impracticable, we might at least in justice to our
students do something more for them than merely allow them to
carry out the routine duties of the garden. At Kew valuable
series of lectures and demonstrations are given which are much
appreciated by the young men, and which may be of incalculable
value to them hereafter. What a boon it would be to our
Chiswick students if haply they might be permitted to avail
themselves of these lectures. Already, we believe, the young
gardeners from Kew occasionally avail themselves of these
gardens for the purpose of seeing carried out those operations in
the culture of fruit and vegetables which form no part of the
work at our noble national establishment. Chiswick and Kew
are but a mile or two apart. Would it not be of great advantage
if, so far as the instruction of gardeners goes, this reciprocal
action could be regularised and extended so that the one esta-
blishment could be made the complement of the other? Govern-
ment aid cannot be expected in this country for the development
of any such scheme. It is not our way of doing things to rely
on State aid. At the same time many of the County Councils
have shown and are showing a desire to utilise the funds placed
at their disposal in the promotion of the higher education of
gardeners, and were a suitable scheme propounded it is hardly
to be doubted that substantial aid and encouragement might be
forthcoming from this and probably from other sources.
DISCUSSION.
Sir JosepH Hooker expressed his pleasure at being present
at such an interesting meeting, and listening to such an in-
teresting discourse by Dr. Masters. He was, perhaps, the last
man in this country with a knowledge of horticulture as it was
in the twenties. David Douglas, that famous collector of the
Royal Horticultural Society, was a personal friend of his, and
from him he received a good deal of instruction in his early days.
Indeed, he once saved his life by pulling him out of the rapids.
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ? 171
From Douglas’s day to this he did not know of anyone who had
done so much for horticulture, and nothing was more interesting
to him than to see the plants which he introduced growing in
the plant borders and shrubberies. There was one great
difference, he said, between conducting any experiments in
England and abroad: it was, that abroad the Government assisted
and encouraged such undertakings, but in England they had to
be carried out by private enterprise. In the United States there
were so many kinds of destructive pests—both fungoid and
insect—that it became absolutely incumbent on the Government
to create experimental stations with a view to discovering the
best means of combating these enemies to horticulture and aori-
culture. He was greatly in favour of the higher education of
gardeners, but he thought there might be some little difficulty as
to enabling the Chiswick students to participate in the Kew
lectures. He did not anticipate any help whatever from the
Government in the way of a grant; and he remembered well,
when Director of Kew Gardens, the great difficulty he had to
obtain £100 a year from the Treasury for providing lectures for
the young gardeners. Although he believed in lectures turning
out a better class of gardeners, he said that at first he was much
disappointed, because, after having instituted the first course of
lectures at Kew, he received a deputation from the young gar-
deners, asking that a course of lessons in “ ribbon gardening”
should be substituted for the lectures !
Mr. H. J. Verron said he remembered the gardens before their
dimensions had been curtailed; and, considering the effect of the
drainage system and growth of London upon the atmosphere of
Chiswick, he thought that if experiments were to be carried out
on anything like a large scale, it would be advisable to conduct
them elsewhere than at Chiswick. The gardens of the Society
would, in his estimation, become gradually less valuable with
time as an experimental station, and it would be necessary to
seek a better soil and a purer atmosphere.
Dr. C. B. Puowricut was in favour of spraying experiments
being carried out at Chiswick, and of the results being published.
He noticed that in an atmosphere vitiated by sulphur, fungoid
diseases were almost absent. He did not know whether there
was much or any sulphur in the Chiswick atmosphere, but he
noticed a comparative absence of fungoid attacks. Dusting with
©
C2
172 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
sulphur, burning affected parts, spraying with Bordeaux mixture, f
had all been tried as remedies, and now sulphide of potassium
seemed to be the great destroyer. Practical experiments, how-
ever, were the only reliable methods to depend upon, and he
thought Chiswick a place in which they should be conducted.
The PresipENT said the Council had already considered the
question of making Chiswick a proper school of horticulture, and
a few years ago the matter had been thoroughly discussed, with
the result that certain difficulties were found to be in the way.
No doubt the County Councils were ‘ squeezable”’ to a certain
extent, but as a rule these bodies wanted a quid pro quo for any
money which they expended. If some method of giving the
Councils a return could be devised, then something might possibly
be done. There was no doubt little progress would be made
until the question of diseases and how to meet them was taken
up more generally by gardeners. The Germans were ahead of
us in this respect, and they seemed to spare no pains in pro-
ducing expert chemists to study various diseases, and attached
great importance to their training. We, on the other hand, were
still satisfied with our old ‘‘rule of thumb” methods, while
America was going in for experiments on a large scale. If there
was any chance for the Society to improve matters he thought it
would do so, but it was useless to expect any help from the
Government.
The Secretary of the Society, the Rev. W. Wiuxs, said that
he had received a great many letters from absent members of the
Committees, expressing regret at their not being able to he present
that day, and he asked leave to read two of them, coming, as
they did, from such diverse places and persons, viz., from Mon-
sieur Henry de Vilmorin, in Paris, and from Mr. Malcolm Dunn,
in Dalkeith. M. de Vilmorin wrote: ‘‘. . . . In my opinion the
tests of garden varieties of plants, as they are at present conducted,
would alone suffice to make Chiswick eminently useful..... i’
Mr. Maleclm Dunn wrote: ‘‘. . . . I do not know the views that
are held by the Council upon the ‘ better utilization ’’ of Chiswick
Gardens, but whatever may be suggested, I sincerely hope nothing
will be done to spoil their great value as an independent testing
centre for the horticultural productions, new and old, of the
country. Whatever is said to the contrary by cranks and self-
interested and disappointed people, the gardens have been, and
WHAT CAN WE DO AT CHISWICK ? 178
are still, looked upon as the most independent and fairest
establishment in the country for testing the merits of horti-
cultural productions, and the verdicts passed upon them have
undoubtedly been looked upon by the general horticultural
public as a fair and unbiassed estimate of their value. It is
no doubt quite true that errors have been made, but with all
that, the good work done has been invaluable to the horti-
culturists of the country, and its cessation would be a severe
loss to gardeners, whatever it might be to the introducers of
novelties. ....”
GARDEN INSECTS.
By Mr. W. D. Drury, F.R.H.S.
[Read July 27, 1897.]
(The illustrations to this paper have been kindly supplied by Mr. Upcot
Gill from the new edition of Nicholson’s “ Dictionary of Gardening.’’]
Insects generally play such an important part in the economy
of Nature, that it is astonishing how little they are understood
by the gardener, be he amateur or professional. This is the
more to be regretted since that little learning which is pro-
verbially considered dangerous would often mean just the
difference between success and failure with his crops. True, of
recent years, the advantages of the study of entomology in
respect of its bearing upon the garden have been forced upon
the cultivator, and the economics of the subject have been
placed before him in a manner undreamt of in the philosophy of
the old-time gardener. We have, for instance advanced con-
siderably since the days when the aid of the parish officials was
invoked to clear away the useful little ladybirds. Yet rather
more than sixty years ago that was done by a town now so
closely identified with horticulture as Reading. There had been
a tremendous influx of these beetles, and it is recorded how the
“‘ wiseacres requisitioned the parish engines and private ones to
pour upon the useful creatures tobacco-fumigated water, to
attack and disperse them.” Still, with all the advances made,
we are yet a long way behind our American cousins alike as
regards the theoretical and the practical side of economic
174 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
entomology. Even our Continental neighbours are ahead of us
—a circumstance which tends to place those responsible for the
tilling of the soil at a considerable advantage over their less
fortunate brethren in this country. In the secondary schools in
Germany biological science forms part and parcel of the educa-
tional curriculum, and thus a most useful foundation for the
study of insects is laid at a very early age, and at a time when
the mind is so receptive, that what is then taught is invariably
retained in after life when more serious work is taken up. In
England the case is very different, and it is quite the exception
for even the most elementary knowledge of insects to be
imparted in schools; while the man or youth who essays to
learn something of the creatures with which he may come in
contact is viewed in the light of a lunatic, his net and other
collecting paraphernalia being considered by every yokel as
abundant evidence of his particular form of madness.
Again take the case of the amateur gardener. How seldom
is it that he troubles to inform himself concerning the number-
less creatures which in the pursuit of his hobby necessarily come
across his path. He knows “ greenfly” when he sees it, per-
chance “‘ wireworm,” and the symptoms of attack of certain
other creatures; but of their life-history he knows absolutely
nothing, and he depends almost entirely upon rule-of-thumb
methods for dealing with all sorts of pests. To him nearly
every small creature is regarded as an insect—from the wood-
louse or the centipede to the garden spider and the slug. Yet
an insect is so well defined that even the veriest novice, once he
has been informed as to its chief characteristics, could not well
make a mistake. So accustomed, too, is he to regard the
destructive propensities of the many, that the utilitarian pro-
perties of the comparatively few are almost invariably overlooked
or altogether ignored. Only too ready is he to crush out of
existence some creature of whose place in the economy of
Nature he knows little, and about whose value he appears to care
less. Maybe it is a repulsive-looking insect which has been
turned up with the soil, or which has been summarily ejected
from its day retreat. ‘This ugliness is quite sufficient to seal
its doom, and without a moment’s consideration the creature is
ruthlessly destroyed. Beetles in particular seem to come in for
more than their share of this ill-bestowed attention, and it is
GARDEN INSECTS. 175
no untruth to say that each year thousands of the most useful
kinds are sacrificed at the shrine of Ignorance. Some may
urge that with so vast an order as the Coleoptera it is impossible
for the gardener to decide which are useful and which injurious.
This fact, however, remains: the most useful of all the beetles
are without exception those most commonly met with in gardens,
and thus they may be readily identified. This also holds good
with many insects belonging to other orders. Nowadays one
often hears the older gardeners say that in their time not half so
much was heard of the injuries inflicted by insects upon crops.
To a certain extent this is correct, and the fact is readily
accounted for. The area of land under cultivation is far greater
now than at any previous period in the history of horticulture,
and in the process, the beautifully delicate balance of Nature
has been rather rudely disturbed, and we are suffering
accordingly.
Within the space of such a paper as this it is not possible to
do justice to a subject which opens up such a wide field. My
object will be rather to stimulate the coming generation of
gardeners to greater things, and to prosecute still further the
studies which the entomologists of our day have done so much
to promote. Horticulture and entomology are very intimately
associated—so intimately in fact that to be successful in the
one the gardener must have more than a passing acquaintance
with the other. There is a wide field for investigation in which
at present the labourers are all too few.
In making a few brief remarks upon some of the more
important orders which go to make up the Class Insecta, it willbe
well to commence with the beetles. Their extreme diversity of
form, size, colour, and marking, their peculiarities of structure,
their divergent habits, the conditions under which they are
found, their wide geographical range, and their enormous
- numbers, invest them with more than an ordinary interest to
the student of Nature. 'This exalted position among insects 1s
one to which perhaps the majority of entomologists think them
entitled, though there are a very large number who aver that
the Hymenoptera, on account of their higher development and
superior intelligence, are entitled to first rank. The question,
however, is a vexed one and has but little practical bearing upon
the subject.
176 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Coleoptera.—Of the vast beetle army which are concentrated
in gardens none are more familiar than certain representatives
of the genus Carabus, or Ground beetles, and none are entitled
to greater respect at the hands of the gardener. It is the type
of the great family Carabide, to which belong by far the greatest
number of carnivorous species. Indeed with two or three excep-
tions none are vegetable feeders. No garden is too small to
yield its quota of these insects, which are not only large but
often beautifully
coloured. Three
species are com-
monly met with in
gardens: C. 2emo-
ralis, Fig. 85 (C.
hortensis of some
authors), with
brassy, coppery,
or green wing-
cases; C. viola-
ceus, with black
wing-cases, whose
margins are vari-
ously coloured
with blue, purple,
or bright red; and
C. monilis, with
green, coppery, or
violet wing-cases
elegantly granu-
lated, each of three
rows of dots being divided by raised lines. All are familiar and
equally lovely. Neither of these beetles is capable of flight ;
for the simple reason that it possesses no wings; while the
wing-cases if examined will be found “soldered,” as it is termed.
Though they are not able to fly, they can run with great
rapidity, and will travel long distances in search of food. Their
good deeds are undoubtedly lost sight of by the majority of
gardeners, as the insects are nocturnal, lying concealed during
the day-time under stones, flower-pots, and the like. They are
exceedingly rapacious, and with their powerful jaws soon make
Fic. 35.—Carabsus NEMoRALIS (twice natural size).
GARDEN INSECTS. 177
short work of any vegetable-feeding beetle, mollusc, or earth-
worm, which they may come across. Nor is it only as perfect
insects that they are of service: the larve are equally useful.
These elongated creatures, like the perfect insects, are pro-
vided with formidable jaws, while at the other extremity of the
body are two horny processes each armed with a sharp point.
Unfortunately little is known of the larval life of beetles
generally, as, unlike the larve of many lepidopterous insects,
their habits are such that they cannot be readily observed.
On the Continent there is another most useful garden
Carabus (C. auratus). Itis a veritable gem as regards colouring,
the brilliant metallic green wing-
cases, with golden reflections,
being indescribably beautiful.
From time to time specimens of
this insect have been captured
on produce consigned to the
London and other markets; but
we cannot with good grace claim |
it as a native. In France it is
as common as the three species
with us already noted; and itis
always welcomed by the horti-
culturist, as it keeps in check
hose pests the cockchafers.
Fia. 36.—CiIcINDELA CAMPESTRIS
Equally well known as the (much enlarge).
Ground beetles, though not as
useful, are the pretty and somewhat variable “ Sunshiners’”’
(Amara), which from childhood’s day one is taught to protect ;
for to kill them is to bring rain. On any fine warm day in
spring these beetles may be found darting hither and thither in
bright sunshine, or maybe making use of their ample wings.
Amongst these we find both animal and vegetable feeders, but
the good done by the majority more than atones for the
delinquencies of the one or two which eat the seeds of certain
plants. A. aulica is the largest of the familiar ‘‘ Sunshiners” ;
it measures about half an inch long, and is of a pitchy-black
colour. These little beetles are often found under stones and
garden rubbish.
Closely allied to the ‘“Sunshiners” is an insect often
178 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
abundant in gardens—Harpalus ruficorms. Like them, it loves
bright sunshine, and may be found disporting itself on warm
spring days. It is, however, chiefly nocturnal, and on dull
days may be ousted from its retreat under stones. Occasionally
this species indulges in a vegetarian diet, and the luscious
strawberry affords the necessary variation. This insect is of
oblong form and of extremely sombre colouring, the only relief
to its funereal hue being furnished by the reddish antenne and
legs. I have taken it by dozens in strawberry-beds which have
been mulched.
In sandy localities may be noticed on the wing, in bright
sunshine only, a number of insects swift of flight, but whose
outward form it is practically
impossible to recognise. If
they are closely watched, as
they can be—for although
their flight is rapid the actual
distance travelled is not great
y —they will be at once distin-
guished as the ferocious little
Tiger beetles, which, when
captured, will frequently with
their jaws clasp so tightly the
collector’s net, that they are
Fie, 37.—Mate axp Feaare Growworm With difficulty taken there-
(Lampyris noctiluca). from. As they dart swiftly
by, there is nothing to suggest
the bright colours which are now revealed to the eye—a lovely
green ornamented with spots of white or yellowish-white. They
do not remain long in one spot, and it must be remembered that
they are as fleet of foot as they are agile on the wing. Though
Cicindela campestris (fig. 386) is under three-quarters of an inch
long, it is one of the most ferocious of British beetles. So
rapacious indeed is it that if two specimens were captured and
placed in a box together there would be a battle royal, and in the
end it would be a case of the survival of the stronger. They render
signal service to the gardener, and this both as perfect insects
and as larve. Indeed, the cunning the latter display in awaiting
their prey with jaws extended at the entrance to their burrows
is truly marvellous.
GARDEN INSECTS. 179
‘ Still keeping to insect friends, we now come to what may be
described as the ugliest, the most useful, and the most perse-
cuted of the huge group, in the familiar Devil’s Coach-horse,
Ocypus olens. There is hardly a garden in the kingdom in
which this insect is not to be found, and regretfully must it be
admitted that there are very few where it receives that pro-
tection to which, in the interests of horticulture, it is entitled.
There can hardly be any doubt that its very boldness creates
enemies, for when molested by man the fearless little creature
will elevate its tail and open wide its powerful mandibles, ag if
to say, “Come on.” Of an insect so readily recognised no
description is, or at least should be, necessary. It may not,
however, be generally known that concealed
beneath the short elytra are some powerful
wings capable of carrying the insect a long
distance in a very short time. Fearless to a
degree, it wages war against the largest of
insect foes, and invariably proves victorious.
Ocypus olens, though perhaps the incarnation
of beetle ugliness, is an insect which every
gardener should welcome and do his best to
encourage and preserve.
Two or three other species yet claim the
gardener’s attention on account of their utility
—the familiar Ladybirds, the beautiful Glow-
worm, and the gloomily clad Pterostichi. The
Glowworm is of especial interest as being fig. 38- porrno-
Britain’s only light-bearing insect; but its value sTIcHUs mapipvs.
to the gardener and the farmer lies in the
fact that it destroys vast numbers of the destructive snails
belonging to the genera Zonites and Helix, and is strictly car-
nivorous in its tastes. It is the female which illumines our
southern country gardens in summer, and oftener still our
waysides, her mate being seldom in evidence except to the
entomologist. By the average person the female Glowworm when
picked up is not regarded as a beetle, and little wonder when one
looks at the soft larviform body quite destitute of wings (Fig. 37 B),
in this respect being in direct contrast to the male, which has
ample wings and wing-cases (fig. 87 a.) The larve, too, which
are often unearthed, are also very useful: they differ but little in
180 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
general appearance from the female perfect insects. At the hinder
extremity of the body, however, will be found an apparatus with
which the creatures are able to remove the slime from their
mouths at the end of their snail-feast—a truly marvellous
provision of Nature.
Some of the Pierostichi are amongst the commonest garden
insects, and they are exclusively carnivorous. P. madidus, an
insect about three-quarters of an inch long, of a deep shiny black,
and with ovate wing-cases (fig.
88), is very abundant. Like the
Carabide generally, these insects
are night-feeders, and it is only
when digging or when removing
rubbish that they are brought to
light. Another common species is
P. vulgaris, found under stones. It
is a trifle larger than its last named
relative, which in all other respects
it resembles.
The part the Ladybirds play in
clearing our gardens of aphides is
fairly well known; but it is much
to be feared that the black, slaty-
grey larvee as well as the pup are
often unwittingly destroyed. The
latter of course are inactive, but
Fic. 39.—Musx BEeruer the larve are even more voracious
(Aromia moschata). than the perfect insects.
Time will not admit of my
enlarging upon the many beetles which the gardener has to
confront in the shape of foes. Moreover, these are more
familiar than the friends, and their ‘“‘funny little ways’’ are
dealt with in most up-to-date horticultural publications.
There are one or two, however, about which considerable
misconception frequently arises in the minds of the amateur
gardener—the wire-worm in particular. Such common and
destructive creatures one would naturally think were uni-
versally known, but a long connection with a journal dealing
largely with gardening matters has shown me that all sorts of
animals are confused with the true wire-worms. ‘These are in
ae
P. 3t x
bee
i chs
GARDEN INSECTS, 181
reality the larve of certain active little beetles popularly known
as Skipjacks—Agriotes sputator, A. obscurus, A. lineatus, and
A. hemorrhoidalis. They are therefore true insects, and are pro-
vided with the orthodox six legs characteristic of the class to
which they belong. For all that, one is constantly receiving as
wire-worms, millipedes, and even centipedes, both of which belong
to the Myriapoda. Now, it is very necessary that the gardener
should be able to distinguish these latter animals and know the
respective part each plays. As a matter of fact the millipedes
and the centipedes differ considerably in habit. The former are
slow of movement and vegetarians; the latter are extremely
Fic. 40.—PERIPLANETA AUSTRALASIZ.
active and carnivorous, capturing their prey alive. Both common
names are misleading, as neither of the animals possesses the
number of legs suggested. One or two of the centipedes common
in gardens are also of interest as being amongst the few light-
bearing animals in this country. They are frequently mistaken
for glowworms.
One is tempted to linger over the peculiar habits of some of
the more destructive garden beetles. Phyllotreta nemoruwm, for
instance, which in the early part of the season may be found in
that common wayside flower, the Shepherd’s Purse (Capsella
bursa-pastoris), and later plays such havoc with the turnip crop ;
or to extol the beauties of the asparagus beetle (Cricoceris
182 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
asparagt), with its peculiar cross-like markings; or, yet again,
to refer to the length of time the larve of the wood-feeding
kinds, like the large, graceful, and sweet-smelling Musk-beetle
(fig. 839) which affects our willows, and the gigantic Stag-beetle
(Lucanus cervus), whose formidable mandibles strike terror into
the hearts of the timid, remain in that state.
I must, however, pass on to the Orthoptera. In this order
are to be found the largest of all insects as well as two or three
which are amongst the most familiar of those found in gardens—
earwigs; while it also includes such omnivorous pests as the
cockroaches. The latter in particular call for extended notice
Fic. 41.—PERIPLANETA AMERICANA.
by reason of the fact, that despite much vaunted insecticides and
traps of every kind, they continue to increase with alarming
rapidity. This is true not only as regards the common cock-
roach (Periplaneta orientalis), the much-abused and misnamed
‘‘ blackbeetle ’’ of our kitchens, but also in respect of three other
species, which of recent years have linked their fortunes with
man and taken up their abode in his plant-houses. There is
scarcely any need to refer to the injuries cockroaches inflict
upon the fronds of young ferns, the petals of choice orchids, the
shoots of vines, or even upon the bunches of grapes themselves.
Rather is it necessary to direct attention to the danger which
threatens the gardener from their increase. Even our common
cockroach is not a native, though it has been so long with us
GARDEN INSECTS, 188
now as to be considered naturalised. Like the bed-bug, it is one
of those insects with which an interchange of commerce hag
presented us. At first it was confined to comparatively few
districts, but now it has spread over a vast area, and there ig
scarcely a village home in which the cockroach is not to be
found, it having to a great extent supplanted the chirping
““merry”’ cricket. Being night roamers, cockroaches are liable
to be overlooked and their depredations to be put down to other
causes. Fortunately, contrary to the general rule with regard
to insect life, the cockroach takes a long time to arrive at maturity.
Instead of a year being required to complete the cycle of
existence, some five years are entailed in the process. Being
natives of warmer climes, artificial heat is absolutely necessary
to their well-being, and this our plant-houses admirably afford.
Here the pests can increase in comparative safety, for although
it is possible to destroy vast numbers of the insects, to exter-
minate them is out of the question. This difficulty is not a little
due to the way nature has ordained the eggs shall be protected.
In common with some Orthoptera the cockroaches deposit their
eggs in capsules, which are hermetically sealed, and thus defy
insecticides and the like.
I should now like to remark upon two of the new-comers—
P. australasia (fig. 40) and P. americana (fig. 41). Though in
general appearance the former bears some resemblance to P. orien-
talis, yet in many respects it differs materially. First it is some-
what larger and has perfect wings in both sexes, whereas with P.
orientalis only the males possess them. The colour isa red sienna-
brown, with a yellow streak along the costal margin of the fore-
wing at the basal half: the pronotumis almost black, with a yellow
margin all round. Despite the specific name, this cockroach
does not appear to be a native of Australia. Mr. Dale took
it at Sherborne, in Dorsetshire, in 1839, and Mr. MacLachlan
noticed it in the Entomologists’ Monthly Magazine a few years
since from Belfast. At Swanmore Park Gardens, Bishop’s Wal-
tham, Hants, it is established and does much damage. In the
palm-house and in the forcing-pits at Kew, P. australasi@ is
very common, and is found to attack the young shoots and the
axillary buds. Phosphorus paste has, however, proved very
effective in destroying them. The insects are very lively in a
warm atmosphere, but sluggish in a cool one.
184 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
’ P. americana is again larger than P, australasia, and, like
that insect, fully winged in both sexes. It has not the yellow
mark along the costa, nor the distinct yellow ring round the
pronotum, and in general the insect has a more suffused appear-
ance. The cerci are different in shape from those of the last.
It is a great nuisance on ships, and is found in most continental
ports, while several English ones have also been invaded by it.
In the Zoological Gardens, London, it is extremely abundant,
while it has also turned up in
Kew Gardens, the Royal Horti-
cultural Society’s Gardens, and
at Covent Garden Market. Be-
ing omnivorous it is always a
pest, and, as the specific name
implies, it is a native of America
(perhaps imported thither from
Asia).
Lately one or two specimens
of another cosmopolitan cock-
roach, very dark in colour, have
been found. This is Lewcophea
Immature. surinamensis (fig. 42). Two
Fic. 42.—LEvcoPpH®A SURINAMENSIS. had previously been taken at
Bognor, probably imported in
pananas, and it appears to be breeding at Kew.
Coming to the earwigs, we have at once some of the best
known, the most graceful, and the most interesting of British
insects. That they inflict considerable injury upon certain
plants there can be little doubt ; but that they are not as bad as
they are usually painted I am firmly convinced. The fact is
they are not strict vegetarians, and will frequently forsake the
petals of flowers and the interior of fruits for a diet of larve or
small snails. Though not wishing to defend the marauding
propensities of the little insects, yet it is hardly fair to speak of
their failings, and leave their good deeds unrecorded. Two
species are common here—Forficula auricularia, which is
ubiquitous, and Labia minor. The other five species are very
scarce. Especial interest centres around earwigs from the fact
that they are the only insects which take any care of the eggs
when laid. They even go to the extent of removing them toa
Mature.
GARDEN INSECTS. 185
place of safety should danger threaten, and of “ brooding ”’ them.
Earwigs are remarkable, too, on account of their possessing
forceps at the hinder extremity of the body. These vary con-
siderably in the case of the male, though they are never straight ;
but they are very constant in the case of the female, being
always straight, with hooked tips. The exact purpose of these
forceps is not known. In some species (winged) they assist in
replacing the exquisitely folded wings; but in others (wingless
kinds) they may be useful as weapons of defence. Few people
seem to credit the common earwig with the possession of the
wings, which are neatly folded under the tegmina, and which are
seldom used in flight except perhaps in the autumn; nor would
many recognise the smaller Labia minor when on the wing.
The Newroptera constitute an order of insects which, as far
as Britain is concerned, contains not a single individual which is
hurtful in gardens; while at the same time it includes some of
the greatest friends the gardener has in the genera Chrysopa
and Hemerobius. Nor must the much-dreaded Dragonflies be
lost sight of, for they are decidedly beneficial insects. Though
chiefly found in those gardens where there are ornamental
waters, yet they will hawk for their prey some distance from the
stream which gave them birth. Of the Chryopides (Lacewing-
Flies, Golden Eyes, or Stink-Flies), there are some fifteen species
in this country; but only two or three are at all common in gardens.
These are, however, so eminently useful that not one gardener
or farmer who values his crops can afford to ignore their great
services. Delicate though they look, they are voracious to a
degree, and destroy as perfect insects and larve myriads of
aphides. They are readily distinguished by their conspicuous
golden eyes, long slender antenne and gauzy wings—some
beautiful shade of green—the beautiful colours, however, which
one sees soon fade when the insect is dead, as is the case with
dragonflies. Once seen they can hardly be confused with any-
thing else. Lacewing-Flies often find their way into houses, and
windows afford them special attraction, while they may be found
in abundance upon palings. The eggs are extremely curious,
and should always be protected; they are fairly conspicuous,
being laid singly at the end of long stalks, but several in a group.
The larve are not unlike those of ladybirds. Some of them
clothe themselves with the skins of their victims after the manner
DH
186 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of certain of the Hemerobides. These latter insects are less
readily recognised than the Lacewing-Flies, but are none the less
true friends. They are smaller than the Chrysopides, and not
so strikingly coloured.
Dragonflies assist in preserving Nature’s balance by devour-
ing butterflies, moths, &c. On any bright day in summer these
creatures of the sun may be found hawking for prey. Of the
larger species, the body only of the moth, butterfly, or what not
is eaten, the wings being allowed to fall to the ground. To that
abundant pest, the Silver Y-Moth, the dragonflies seem very
partial, as also to the equally troublesome craneflies, and I have
frequently taken dragonflies with these insects in their jaws. The
Odonata have not been studied in this country with half the
zeal that has been bestowed upon some other and less interesting
families, though one enthusiastic naturalist, Mr. W. J. Lucas, is
about to give to the world the benefit of his labours in that
direction.
Hymenoptera.—The insects comprised in this order have
strong claims upon the gardener’s attention by reason of the
part they play in the fertilisation of his flowers; while the
intelligence displayed by ants, bees, and wasps is not equalled
by any other insect. Then, too, the order includes the ichneumon
flies and the sawflies—the one working for the gardener’s good,
and the other to his certain loss. To separate the sheep from
the goats in so vast an order is somewhat difficult, as now and
again there is a very fine boundary line. ‘Take the case of the
Social wasps, of which there are seven species in this country.
That they confer a benefit upon the gardener by destroying the
larvee of certain noxious insects no one will dispute; but this
benefit is nullified by the injuries they inflict upon the fruit
crops. ‘This, at any rate, holds good in respect of six out of the
seven species found here. The hornet (Vespa crabro) is the
exception, for though occasionally taking toll of fruit, it practi-
cally subsists upon caterpillars, while it does not hesitate to
attack and devour other Social wasps. From the other Social
wasps it may be distinguished by its much larger size and deeper
yellow markings on a brown (not a black) ground.
The other section of the family, the Solitary wasps, are insects
deserving of protection, as they render incalculable service,
They are freguently found in gardens, and may be seen on
GARDEN INSECTS, 187
umbelliferous and other flowers diligently searching for larve.
These they sting, so as to render them insensible, and then
carry off to the hole in which they have decided their family
shall be reared. The food having been collected, the eggs are
laid therein, and the entrance to the nest is sealed, the mother-
wasp taking no further trouble with it. In due time the larve
are hatched out, eat of the food ready to hand, and become
pup, emerging the next season to commence again the cycle of
existence. To distinguish between these Sand-wasps (Odyneri)
and the Social wasps is comparatively easy. The body, which in
all wasps is more or less pear-shaped, is markedly so in the case
of the Odyneri, and has been aptly likened by Mr. Butler to a
* neg-top ’’ surmounted by a polo cap which is too small for it.
A still further distinction lies in the tarsal hooks, which are
simple in the Social, and hooked in the Solitary wasps. These
latter obtrude their presence upon man by making a nest under
his very nose. In one instance known to me, a female solitary
wasp had the temerity to take up her abode on the frame of a
blackboard, which was constantly in use in a schoolroom, bringing
larve to her quarters in the way characteristic of the insects.
It is hardly necessary to refer to the part bees play in the
garden, and I will pass on to the consideration of the ants. Are
these insects injurious or otherwise in the garden? is a question
often asked. One naturally hesitates to condemn as injurious
insects possessed of such a high degree of intelligence as the
ants. Yetitis impossible to shut one’s eyes to the fact that,
besides making unsightly heaps in garden paths and elsewhere,
they give encouragement to the honey-dew-secreting aphides,
and these destroy not only the shoots, by sucking the very life
from them, but, by closing the pores by their sticky secretion
and their excrement, prevent the leaves from exercising their
proper functions. And on these scores alone ants, much as we
admire their industry, must be condemned.
We now come to the parasitic Hymenoptera, which are of
immense value to the gardener, though they seldom receive any
credit. Were it not, however, for these parasites the gardener’s
troubles would be increased forty-fold. Every boy who has col-
lected butterflies is familiar with the ichneumoned larve and
pup which in certain seasons he meets with more than in others.
The ichneumon flies responsible for this, belong to the group now
D2
188 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
under notice. One of the most useful is Apanteles glomeratus,
which is of such service in keeping in check those pests of our —
kitchen gardens, the Cabbage Whites. This, however, is but
one of a mighty army working unseen in man’s best interests,
The yellowish cocoons of the ichneumon flies should never be dis- ~
turbed by the gardener, as in the course of time they will hatch
out into flies, and these in their turn commence anew the cycle
of existence. ‘The flies themselves would not be recognised, but
by preserving the cocoons he is certainly doing the best he can for
his crops. Popularly it is supposed that the eggs of the parasite
are deposited in the butterfly or other larve, and these afterwards
are literally eaten alive. Nothing, however, could be more
erroneous. The ‘“ichneumoned” larve do not apparently feel
any ill effects from the visitors until they are about to pupate,
when they usually sicken and die, although occasionally perfect
insects will emerge from pupz so infested. What really takes
place is that the host-caterpillar continues to feed, even more
voraciously than ever, but the juices it absorbs are intercepted by
the parasites.
Sawfies, again, though so very destructive and so very
numerous, are kept in check by these parasitic Hymenoptera.
Again, the aid rendered by the Ichneumon flies to the
fruit-grower is almost incredible ; for some fifty or more species
attack that pest, the Winter Moth (Cheimatobia. brumata).
Everyone therefore who has fruit under cultivation should be
ready to acknowledge the services of the harmless-looking para-
sitic Hymenoptera.
Lepidoptera.—This is the best known of all the orders of
insects, containing as it does the very familiar butterflies, the
beautiful if little-known hawk-moths, and the moths proper. From
the first named the gardener suffers but little; for if we except
the Whites not one of the other sixty odd species give him any
trouble. Thisis the more remarkable seeing that such species
as the Peacock, the Small Tortoise-ghell, Red Admiral, Painted
Lady, Brimstone, one or two of the Blues, Small Copper, &c., are
fairly constant visitors to our gardens. And practically the same
may be said of the hawk-moths. Of the other moths sonumerous
are the foes that to remark upon even a tithe of them would fill
a volume or two. Quite a large number of the larve—for the
perfect insects of all moths and butterflies are harmless—take’
GARDEN INSECTS. 189
toll of the fruit; another section preys upon vegetables ; and yet
others affect flowering plants. The most destructive are amongst
the smallest—Tortrices, or Leaf Rollers, not one of which exceeds
an inch in the stretch of the wings. They are moreover the
most difficult to deal with, feeding as they do in the tube-like
retreats which they construct in such an ingenious manner, and
which has given rise to the appropriate name bestowed upon the
group. From insecticides they are fairly safe, while they do not
run the same chance of being detected by the insectivorous
birds. Two of the most destructive, taken all round, are the
Codlin Moth and the Plum Moth. As moths, nearly all the
group are short-lived, and flying as they do in early morning or
at dusk they are not often seen except by entomologists.
Diptera.—Very few insects of this order, the members of
which are characterised by possessing only one pair of wings,
exert any important influence in the garden. The larve of
the Craneflies (the tough Leather-jackets) and the Onion-flies
are perhaps the most generally Inown and most injurious. Of
late years, however, another species has been causing the apple-
grower some anxiety. This is Zrypeta pomonella, whose cater-
pillars feed upon the pulp of the fruit. The perfect insects closely
approach the house-flies, but possess very prominent eyes of a
most brilliant colour. Turning to friends, there are none more
useful than the Hawk-flies (Sy7phus), whose lovely hues and
bright yellow spots are very distinct. The larve feed upon aphides,
and are frequently found upon rose bushes and chrysanthemums.
They taper considerably towards the head, but have a blunt and
widish hinder extremity. Their method of progress is somewhat
curious, and has been aptly likened to the movement of the
leeches of our ditches. As soon as the grubs are full-fed they
attach themselves by their tails to the food-plant, using a kind of
sticky secretion for the purpose. Thus the pupal stage is passed,
and the perfect insects quickiy emerge. Such larve as are found
should never be interfered with, as they are amongst the most
voracious of all aphis-feeding insects.
Hemiptera.—tn this order the members are characterised by
possessing a beak-like mouth, consisting of four sharp stylets, by
means of which the juices of plants are extracted. The order
is again subdivided into Heteroptera and Homoptera purely on
the structure of the wings. So far as the gardener is concerned
190 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the first sub-order is of no consequence; but the second forces
itself upon his attention by reason of the fact that it contains
some of the most injurious pests in the whole range of insects.
To it belong the destructive Aphides and the Scale insects, the
disgusting-looking Cuckoo Spit insect, and the little-known, so
far as this country is concerned, Grape Phylloxera. The
Aphides, or plant-lice, are undoubtedly the most remarkable of
the whole order, alike as regards their numbers (200 species are
known here), destructive propensities, the variety of food-plants
laid under contribution, and their exceedingly omnivorous tastes.
This last characteristic does not appear to be as well known to
the majority of amateurs as it should be, and comparatively few __
recognise in Aphis pruni, that pest of fruit-growers (for itis not
only a honey-dew secreting kind, but one which feeds curled up
in the leaves), the insect which at another season is working
havoc with certain Composite like Asters and Chrysanthemums. —
This is, however, but one example out of many. Again, the
enormous rate at which plant-lice increase, almost invariably
puzzles the average gardener, who is not alive to the fact that
besides males and females there are asexual individuals which
are viviparous. Moreover these latter for several generations
produce others of the same kind. Of the Woolly Aphis, or
American Blight, little need be said; and so, too, of the Grape
Phylloxera, though the life-histories of both should prove
interesting to every gardener.
Closely allied to the Aphides are the Scale insects, with
many of which fruit-growers at any rate are very familiar.
Their life-history, too, is a very remarkable one. The males are
two-winged (sometimes wingless) flies, but by even the closest
observers they are seldom seen. They are quite incapable of
inflicting any injury upon plants. The females, on the other
hand, are very destructive and fairly conspicuous—at least those
commonly met with in gardens. Having been fertilised, or in
certain cases without the intervention of the male, they deposit
eggs,anddie. With some, the scale-like bodies which were formed
during their larval life, either from an exudation of the body or the
cast skins, serve as coverings for the eggs. Other of the Scales
exude cottony particles like some Aphides, and the Currant Scale
(Pulvinaria ribesig)is one such. These white particles are very
common on Black and Red Currants in summer.
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES. 19]
With the notice of the Hemiptera is concluded my necessarily
brief notes upon garden insects. Throughout friends rather than
foes have been touched upon for reasons adduced at the outset.
My object has been to stimulate the interest of the gardener in
the host of insects which come so readily to hand, so that he
may to some extent distinguish between those which are helpful
and those which are injurious, and thus tend to preserve that
delicate balance in Nature which is so desirable.
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE
) UNITED STATES.
By 8S. C. Lamp, F.R.H.S., California.
REMEDIES FOR INSECTS AND FUNGI.
Ir is very important that every one who has the care of a garden,
orchard, or field should have a clear idea of the remedies avail-
able for preventing the injuries due to insects and fungi. Not
only should we know how to make and apply the remedies, but
it is just as important to know when, and when not, to apply.
Mistakes are often being made, and the following are some of
the most common :—
1. Remedies are often used when there is no need whatever
for treatment, and when there is nothing to destroy.
2. Applications are very often wrongly timed, either before
any good could possibly be produced, or else after the injury
has been done.
3. Often the wrong kind of cure is used, and therefore no
good result is procured.
4. Applications are often made for troubles for which there is
no known practical method of treatment.
5. Expensive methods are often. employed when cheaper
ones would accomplish the same results—cheaper as regards
materials used and labour employed.
Mistakes of judgment in this as in other operations will cause
much loss of time and labour, but they are clearly mistakes of
ignorance, and why should this be allowed to be the cause of
making the cost nearly twice as great? It is, the aim of the
192 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
writer to attempt in a brief compass to show the most important
points to be considered in the treatment of plants.
But it should be distinctly recognised that local experience,
and experiment, are the only real guides to a successful result.
CLASSES OF PEstTs.
Almost all the serious pests that attack plants are insects or
fungi. We can take them in order as they attack a plant.
1. Loot-feeding Insects, which attack the roots of plants. They
may devour the roots, suck the sap, or cause swellings to form,
and the same insect may even attack the plants above ground as
well as at the roots.
2. Boring Insects, which live within the plant, and mostly
attack the stem or trunk, but also bore the leaves and fruit.
3. Sap-sucking Insects, which attack the upper part of the
plant, boring in the leaves and stems to obtain their food. They
resemble those that suck the sap from the roots, but the last are
a much more difficult economic problem.
4, Defoliating Insects, which eat up the leaves and other green
parts of plants.
5. Haternal Fungi, growing over and living upon the exposed
parts of the leaves and stems of plants, and only sending feeding
suckers into the plants.
6. Local Fungi, which enter the plant, but remain at the
point where they found an entrance, and only spread by the
spores being carried to other parts of the plant, and there
growing into it again.
7. Penetrating I’ungi, which have the power of passing from
one part of a plant to another by boring their way through the
plant. Each of the classes of pests must be treated in a different
way, and usually the remedy for one would be entirely useless if
applied for a pest of another class.
INSECTS.
Root-feeding Insects.—Fortunately the number under this
class is not many, for there is no remedy known, that is practical
for general use, by which they can be treated. It is not because
the insects are hard to kill, but because the nature of the soil is
such that it is very difficult to reach them. The best of the
known processes—the use of carbon bisulphide—is not certainly
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES. 198
effectual unless used in such quantities as to destroy the roots of
the plants at the same time, and this is practically useless,
except for disinfecting the soils. The very exhaustive and
unsuccessful experiments made with the phylloxera, especially
in France, make it appear doubtful if anything will ever be
found in the way of treatment for root insects. For annual
crops, the most promising methods at present known are crop
rotation, starvation, and trapping.
Boring Insects.—About the only thing that can be done for
boring insects is to prevent their entrance into the plant. This
may be done by mechanical means, by covering the threatened
parts with something that will either prevent the egg-laying or
form a barrier to the young insect. Thus the use of cylinders of
Wire mosquito net, an inch or two larger than the trunk of the
tree. Borers may also be prevented entrance by coating the part
of the plant liable to attack with some poison, which will be
eaten by the young borer as it attempts to burrow into the plant.
A good coating is a paint composed of glue made green with
“Paris green.’ For green parts of trees, Paris green with water,
applied often to keep the parts well poisoned, will be found a
good destroyer. After the insect has once entered the tree there
does not appear to be any sure cure.*
Sap-sucking Insects.—In this category are included some of
the easiest as well as some of the most difficult insects to destroy,
but they can all be treated successfully as far as we know. It
may be often that the cure will be too expensive to be practical.
This would apply generally to field crops, where the cost per
acre for treatmentis greater than the saving that can ensue from
the application. The insects of this class are not affected by
poisons like Paris green, because they get their food by inserting
their beak into the plant ; nothing, therefore, on the surface of
the leaves will have any particular effect. The only feasible
plan, therefore, is to spray on them some caustic or oily substance,
or to envelop them with some poisonous gas. Plant lice are
ordinarily very easy to kill, but protected insects, like the scale
insects, or very active ones, like the so-called grape thrips, are
far more awkward to deal with. The latter are probably best
* The maggot or grub that bores in apple and pear trees may be easily
detected by the excreta thrown out by the insect at the orifice it entered by.
If a pliable piece of copper wire is inserted with a little force the grub is
generally killed, and the branch or tree is but little the worse.—Eb.
194 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
treated by causing them to leap or fly against a “ hopper doser ”
of some form. A hopper doser consists of a surface of tin, or
other material, covered with printer’s ink, tar, or some other
sticky substance, which holds the insects captive that touch it.
Defoliating Insects.—The insects eating the leaves of plants
are, as a rule, the easiest insects to destroy, and at the least
expense, because the leaves may be covered with relatively cheap
poisonous substances; and as the insects eat the leaf they will
also consume the poison, and thus end their existence. Only
the more valuable field crops can be treated economically, how-
ever, for even as cheap a process as this is too expensive for
most of the staple crops. Insects of the defoliating class can
also be killed by the same remedies used for sap-sucking forms ;
but with those remedies, as is true of the insects of the former
class, the insect must actually be touched by the remedy to be
affected by it.
FUNGI.
External Fungi.—One can easily, with the aid of a small
microscope, see the threads of the fungus. All parts of the
plant above ground are affected, but the young leaves and the
ends of stems are most readily attacked. They may be
destroyed, and the spread of the fungus stopped, by the use of
the vapour of sulphur.
Local Fungi.—Most of the rusts and spot fungi may be
classed under this head. They live within the plant, and
so cannot be destroyed after they once gain an entrance. A
cure, therefore, is impossible, and attention must be turned to
preventing their entrance. The spores are produced very
abundantly and quickly in most species, so that, if treatment is
not given soon after the first appearance of the trouble, it will
be seen to spread with great rapidity, and involve a much larger
part of the plant. The theory of treatment is to keep the
plant covered with some substance which will prevent the
germination or sprouting of the spores, thus preventing the
fungus from entering a new part of the plant. We now know
a number of very effectual substances which will produce this
result.
Penetrating Fungi.—This is the most difficult group of fungi
we have to deal with. Grain smuts, blackberry rust, and curl-
leaf of the peach are examples. In annual plants the infection
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES, 195
usually occurs at about the time the seed sprouts, so that the
destruction of the spores that may be on the seed is often
sufficient to ensure practical immunity. In perennials the only
thing usually to be done is the removal and destruction of the
infested plants. Some diseases of trees due to these fungi may
possibly be controlled by preventing the spread of the disease
(by spores), by the juse of the remedies that are so effectual
against the local fungi, and by vigorous pruning and removing
of new growth, in which the disease is chiefly carried over from
one season to another. This is, at least at present, the most
promising line of experiment in these cases. The experience in
some parts of California with curl-leaf, where it seems to be
entirely controllable, would seem to indicate that the disease is
not, in every region, io be properly classed with these penetrating
fungi. Further study may show that in certain seasons or in
certain regions the disease may arise from a local, and in others
from a penetrating fungus, and so in one place be easily con-
trolled, and in another not at all controllable without the
destruction of the plants affected.
REMEDIES.
There are a great many substances that may be used success-
fully against insects and fungi; but we recommend only a small
list, selected because of their effectiveness and cheapness.
Remedies are applied as a dry powder, as a gas, or as a fluid,
spray or wash, the great majority being in the latter form.
POWDERS.
The most common way of applying powders is the “ pepper-
box ’? method, in which the material is carried in a vessel pro-
vided with perforations, through which it sifts as the vessel is
shaken over the plant. A modification of this, much used
in the cotton fields of the Southern States, consists of bags
of the material suspended from the ends of a pole long enough
to reach from one row of cotton to the next. This is carried
by a man riding on a mule, and the jar causes the powder to
sift through. Cloth is chosen for this purpose, which is fine
enough to allow only the right quantity to be distributed. A
third method, much used in this country, is a blowing device,
which is very satisfactory for field use, and does very rapid work.
196 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Only three remedies are recommended to be used in the dry
form, and these have a rather limited use.
Air-slaked Lime.—This is the powder resulting from the
exposure of ordinary lime to the action of the air for some time.
It is only recommended as a remedy against insects which have
a slimy coating over the body. For these it is a cheap
and effectual remedy. It is not as cheap, however, as Paris
green, but is particularly recommended where the latter is
objectionable because of its poisonous nature. For true slugs,
which are not insects, but have a similar slimy coat, it ig the
best remedy we know of; but it must be applied in the
evening or early morning, while the animals are on the plants;
and may have to be repeated two or three nights in succession’
to kill all. Except in gardens it may not pay to make more than
one application, which will, if rightly timed, destroy most of the
slugs. | .
Sulphur.—tThis is a widely used remedy for the mildew, which
is Socommon on plants in California. The powder is usually
applied by the pepper-box method. It only becomes effectual as
the heat of the sun vaporises it; the field thus treated smells”
strongly of the sulphur during the warmer part of the day, when
the vapour is being produced. On wet cloudy days, when the
mildew is growing and spreading rapidly, the sulphur is inert,
but the first bright day makes it effective. It may be possible to
artificially vaporise the sulphur on a large scale for use in such
weather; but no attempt has yet been carefully made, except in
greenhouses, and then with the best of results. The vapour of
sulphur must be used, and not the gas produced by burning,
which is very injurious to foliage. Sulphur has been found to
be a successful remedy for the so-called red spider, also called
yellow mite—animals somewhat related to the true insects.
Fairly good results are also reported in its use against the thrip.
Tor these purposes the sulphur is used in the same way as for
mildew.
Paris Green or London Purple.—(For a general account of
their action, seeunder Sprays.) These two arsenical poisons are
occasionally used in a dry form, but chiefly suspended in water as
a spray. They are used for the same purposes in either form.
A common practice is to dilute the poison with flour, dust, or
other powder so that it can be more easily and evenly distri-
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES. 197
buted. If not so diluted, care must be taken not to apply it so
thickly in places as to endanger the foliage.
Gas TREATMENTS.
Gases have the property of diffusing themselves with
great rapidity, so that when applied in a closed space every
part of that space will in a short time contain some of the
gas. Thus no other method of killing insects is calculated to be
as thorough in its work. But in an open space this property of
diffusing destroys, to a great extent, its utility. Sulphur applied
as a powder, as has already been stated, is not effective until it
becomes a vapour; and then the dissipation is not as much ag
with most gases, because of the weight of sulphur vapour and the
fact that it is applied over whole fields at once. The imprac-
ticability of enclosing most cultivated plants, and the cost of the
treatment, both in time and chemicals, makes the method
useful to only a very limited extent. We recommend but two
gases.
Carbon Bisulphide——tThis substance is not available for
plants in active growth, and is chiefly useful for stored products,
such as seeds and grains. It can be used for disinfecting soils
and ridding other articles of insects. In disinfecting soils an
injector is used. A number of forms of the latter are on the
market in Europe, where phylloxera eradication has required
them. It is doubtfulif this method of soil disinfection would be
profitable in the United States for the destruction of any insect.
For destroying insects in seeds or grain, carbon bisulphide is a
very cheap and satisfactory means. The bin or box containing
the seeds to be disinfected should be tight, at least at the sides
and below. A dish is placed on top of the material to be treated,
and a quantity of the carbon bisulphide poured in. It evaporates
rapidly, and the vapour, being heavier than the air, sinks into the
lower part of the bin. The top should be covered also, in order
that the vapour may remain a long time in the grain. Very
rarely will bins be perfectly tight, so that the exact amount
necessary cannot bestated. Usually the estimate is made at one
pound to the ton of grain, which is sufficient for a fairly tight
bin. Grape vine cuttings are most successfully disinfected in a
similar way, by placing a saucerful of the bisulphide on the cut-
tings in a tight box, and leaving for forty minutes. The yellow
198 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
jacket, our common wasp, which is so injurious to fruit, and
which makes its nest in the ground, is easily killed by this sub-
stance. The nest is located, and about dark, when the wasps are
all in, about an ounce of carbon bisulphide is poured down the
hole, and a handful of earth thrown over it to keep the vapour
in. By morning all will be found to be dead. Ants’ nests can
be destroyedin the same way. Carbon bisulphide is also one of
the best remedies for gophers. If used in the fall, after the
rains have begun (so that the ground is not too porous), an ounce
poured over a rag and stuffed into a hole and covered with earth
will destroy the inmates.
Hydrocyanic Acid Gas.—This is practically the only acid
which is strong enough to kill the insects on a tree with safety
to the leaves, and within ‘a short time enough to make its use
practical on a large scale. Its work is very effectual and satis-
factory, but it is very expensive, and, therefore, is only available
for the more profitable trees, such as the citrus varieties. It
may also be used for disinfecting. The gas is extremely
poisonous, and, sometimes, for reasons not entirely understood,
is very injurious to the foliage; but the injury is almost all pre-
vented by its use at night. The process is to cover the tree with
a tent of sail-cloth, oiled to make it tight, and in a vessel
beneath the tent the chemicals which make the gas are placed.
After half an hour the tent is removed and put over the next
tree. The chemicals needed for every 100 cubic feet are 4+
ounce of potassium cyanide, = ounce of water, and 3 ounce
of sulphuric acid. The common practice in California is to use
it decidedly stronger for small trees and weaker for the largest
trees. In the smaller trees it is safe to use it stronger, as the
small amount of gas used is very quickly diffused. When it is
produced in large quantity, as is necessary for a large tree, some
of the gas, scarcely at all mixed with air, may come in contact
with the leaves and injure them. The practice probably arose,
in part, from some tables which have been published widely in
California, where the contents of the tent was calculated by
multiplying the height of the tree by its breadth. The practice
is not justifiable, andif the weaker amount is successful there is
no reason for not using the same proportion on smaller trees.
There are many kinds of tents used, and many plans for
changing them from tree to tree, the details of which we cannot
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES, 199
give here. The tent is usually of an octangular shape, and is
furnished with rings for hoisting. The largest tents require a
derrick for lifting them into place. The following are the
amounts of cyanide of potash to be used for trees of varying
heights :—
Height of Tree.
Amount of cyanide of potash
If as broad as high (Navel If % as broad as high (Seed-
oranges, «c.) ling oranges, &c.)
Sk 6 feet 8 feet
ee ee Se Aj eee
Me ww Cle Ie pda
wine 2s fe 12 5 Oe
RS ghd | a, 8 ee |
| 3o:.. er
SPRAYS OR WASHES.
The most important remedies for plant pests are applied as a
spray orwash. Bythe word “wash” one would naturally understand
a more copious application than a spray, but in ordinary usage
the terms are identical. For very low plants an outfit working
on the principle of a sprinkling-can will do; but for better and
more economical work, and work on higher plants, some form of
force pump and spray nozzle is necessary. There are many
forms of pumps on the market that are good for the purpose. A
spray pump should maintain a fairly constant and sufficient
pressure, and its valves and general construction should be
simple and its parts easily replaceable. The nozzle should, for
most spraying work, be such as to break up the stream into a
fine mist; but for scale insects one giving a stream of con-
siderable force is desirable. The shape of the spray is usually
either conical or fan-shaped, and each has its particular advan-
tage for a particular class of work. The construction of the
nozzle should be such as to permit of easy, quick, and thorough
cleaning. A few forms, designed to clean themselves automati-
cally, work well. In most spraying the object is to get the
largest possible proportion of the spray to remain on the leaf or
stem, and to have it well distributed. This is best accomplished
by covering the leaf with minute globules like dew. As soon as
they run together and drip from the leaf the distribution is not
200 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
perfect, and there is actually less left on the leaves. When the
nozzle is held as far from the plant as the stream will carry, the
full effect of the nozzle is obtained in the breaking up of the
stream into mist, and so can produce most perfectly this dew-like
condition. For scale insects the object is somewhat different.
The plan for these is to thoroughly wet the surface of the bark
and the edges of the scale, to ensure the penetration of the wash
beneath the scale, and thus to kill the old scale or the eggs and
young hidden beneath. This thorough wetting is secured by
holding the nozzle close to the plant and applying a great deal
of the wash with a high pressure. Washes are sometimes applied
hot; and when the nozzle is held close to the plant the spray
will penetrate better, and for this reason do better work. Heat is
to be recommended as a remedy only when it can be absolutely
controlled.
Grain Smut.—The method of treating seed wheat and oats
for smut is as follows :—For wheat, soak fifteen minutes in water
at 182° F.; for oats, ten minutes. The grain should be first
placed in water at, say, 115° to partly warm it up. See that the
grain is all wetted, and do not treat too much at a time, or it
will be impossible to keep the water at the proper temperature.
Have boiling and hot water at hand so as to add, to keep the
temperature just right. It must not go above 135° or it may
injure the seed, nor below 130° or it will not be effective. After
treating, dip in cold water to cool and spread out to. dry.
Bordeaux Mixture.-—This is the most used and the most
satisfactory of the known washes for prevention of fungoid
attacks. When sprayed upon the plant it prevents the develop-
ment of the spores of any fungi upon the surface covered ; and it
is thus a perfect preventive of all the fungi which gain an
entrance to the plant in this way. To be effective it must be
kept continuously on the plant that is to be protected. A single
spraying will last from two weeks to a month, or even longer if
the conditions are favourable. With our dry summers one
application will often be found enough for some kinds of fungi.
Late spring rains may make additional sprayings necessary ; and
some fungi may, in some localities, require the repeated sprayings
necessary in a more humid climate. Local experience will have
to determine these points. Bordeaux mixture is made of equal
parts of bluestone (copper sulphate) and lime. Some formulas
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES. 201
give six parts of bluestone to four parts of lime, which will do if
the lime is good. Slake the lime, and dissolve the bluestone
separately. Both should be cold when they are mixed, and the
resultant mixture will be a beautiful blue wash. If mixed hot,
a black compound (copper oxide) is produced, which reduces the
value of the wash. As to the amount of water, we recommend,
for ordinary spraying, 1 lb. of each of the above to ten gallons
of mixture, and for winter use 1 lb. of each for four gallons.
Ammomacal Copper Carbonate.—This solution is very
effectual, but is not as lasting as the Bordeaux mixture. Itisa
perfect solution, and therefore has no tendency to clog the nozzle
(as is the case with the Bordeaux mixture), and can be used on
fruit near the picking season and on ornamental plants, which
would be disfigured with the lime wash. The usual way of
making this wash is to dissolve copper carbonate in ammonia
and then dilute. If the carbonate is not fully dissolved before
the water is added it cannot be further dissolved, and not only is
the carbonate wasted but the fluid will not be up to the standard
strength. It is well, therefore, to give the ammonia ample time
to act, say over night, before adding the water. The proportions
are 1 oz. of the copper carbonate in 10 oz. of ammonia for every
ten gallons of spray. Another way of producing the mixture is to
mix solutions of bluestone and sal soda, dissolving the carbonate
of copper thus produced in ammonia, and diluting with water.
The bluestone and the sal soda should be mixed in about the
proportion of three to four, after having been dissolved separately
in a small quantity of warm water and cooled before mixing.
Three ounces of bluestone with four of sal soda and twenty of
ammonia is sufficient for twenty gallons of spray.
Lime, Salt, and Sulphur Mixture.—This wash is useful both
as an insecticide and a fungicide, but only for winter use on
deciduous trees. It is usually made by boiling the sulphur for
one hour and a half, with about one-fourth of the lime, in a
covered kettle with enough water to cover well; then the rest of
the lime and the salt are added, and the boiling continued half
an hour longer. The proportions are about 6 lbs. of lime, 2 of
salt, and 3 of sulphur for sixty gallons.
Resin Soap.—The cheapest insecticide which kills by contact
is resin soap. It is for scale insects, and so has good penetrating
power. Like all insecticides killing by contact, the effect of the
E
502 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
spray is soon gone, and it only kills the insects which are wet
with its spray. It is generally applied warm. In making the —
soap the ingredients are placed in a closed kettle with enough
water to cover, and are boiled for two hours, when all will be
united into a soap. In diluting, only a little water should be
added at a time, and stirred in; or, better, hot water should be
used, because of the danger of chilling the soap and causing it to
harden, when it is almost impossible to dissolve it again. The
proportions are 8 lbs. of resin, 2 lbs. of standard caustic soda,
and one pint of fish oil for 40 gallons, for use on trees in foliage,*
and the same for 25 gallons to 30 gallons for winter use.
Kerosene.—There has recently been placed on the market
a device for mixing kerosene with water in the pump as it is
being applied, and with very good results. Full directions as to
proportions accompany the device, and we will here only discuss
the precautions to be observed. These are, chiefly, the use of a
nozzle capable of producing a very fine mist, and applying the
spray so that the drops do not run together, 7.e., holding the
nozzle as far as possible from the plant, and not applying
too much. Pure kerosene has great penetrating power, perhaps
the greatest of all the insecticides, and, with the above pre-
cautions, can be safely used.
Kerosene Emulsion.—While not as cheap as resin soap,
kerosene emulsion is easier to make, and, in small quantities or
where the conveniences for boiling are not at hand, is the most
satisfactory remedy. Like resin soap this spray kills by contact.
The ordinary form of the emulsion is something of an art, to be
properly manufactured. The ingredients are two parts of kero-
sene to one of sour milk or of strong soap solution. The latter
must be made boiling hot and added to the kerosene, and the
whole pumped through a spray nozzle for fifteen minutes. After
pumping a few minutes, the whole mass will become beautifully
creamy and apparently perfectly emulsified; but if a little is
placed in water it will be seen that some of the kerosene sepa-
rates out and rises to the surface. When the emulsion is perfect
there will be no separation when diluted. If the soap is of poor
quality or the water is hard, more soap must be used; and, on
the other hand, if both are good, not as much is needed as
* It is very doubtful whether in England 2 lbs. of caustic soda to
40 gallons of water is not too strong a mixture for trees in leaf.—Eb,
THE TREATMENT OF INSECTS AND FUNGI IN THE UNITED STATES. 203
recommended below, which is intended to suit the average con-
dition. The proportions are: Three ounces of soap in three pints
of water or sour milk, and three quarts of kerosene for ten gallons
of emulsion for scale insects, or for fifteen gallons for plant lice.
Another formula, which is easier made but more expensive, and
- so only recommended for use on a small scale, consists of using
eight times as much soap. When so made the creamy mixture
described above, obtained within five minutes, is a permanent
emulsion.
Paris Green and London Purple—These poisons kill only
those insects that eat the leaves covered by them, and are useless ~
against sucking insects like plant lice and scales. They are also
useless against overwhelming numbers of insects, such as
swarms of grasshoppers, which are able to eat up the plant
before getting poison enough to kill them. Arsenic is the active
principle in both these poisons, and is about equally strong in
both. Paris green is copper arsenite, and London purple an
arsenite of lime containing an aniline residue, to which the
purple colour is due. The latter is a finer powder and remains
better suspended in water, but the Paris green is, as a rule, safer
to apply. Both poisons, if applied too strong, will burn the
foliage, and both require constant stirring or the material will
settle to the bottom, and so not be uniformly distributed. For
the best results the poison should not be allowed to drip from
the tree, and the finer the spray the better. ‘These poisons do
not as a rule remain any great length of time on the plant, but
must be renewed every two or three weeks, or while the danger of
insect attack exists. In mixing the poison it is well to first
make a paste with a little water and then dilute, as otherwise it
is difficult to wet the leaves with it. The amount used is about
1 lb. to 200 gallons of water.*
The following table is intended to give, at a glance and in a
small compass, the ingredients, proportions, and method of pre-
paration of various washes. For convenience they are calculated
in per cents. for metric calculations, while the amounts necessary
for five and forty gallons respectively (as representing an oil-can
_and barrel) are given in the common weights and measures.
*In England 1 oz. to 20 gallons of water is sufficient. We have
known trees seriously damaged by the application of 1 oz. to 10 gallons,
N.B.—Trees should never be sprayed whilst in bloom.—Ep.
E 2
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
204
"SZO 9 "sz0 00-21 — — a[dind uopuory
, : | 1o udeId SUB
*SOJNUTUL OAT XIP l “34 4 te aie ee as Kl * 4yjSue14s [ensQ
a g # & 00-8 9 © © 9UesOlEy
‘sy8 +L ‘syd fT 00-F “XIN *yjsueq4s [ens uoIS[NUa
‘uorTyntos dvos | at & *SZO &r ez. “dg {Toe anos a: duo ‘ oe ‘ae
@ 10 aan ing pos OS) “SUTUE S ade «3 60-¢ {e-¢ fF onptajoy |. oat
Bare tens foie es ox | v3 ; Hite AGE A crosscn soners| aaa of SR
"sad $1 + 8 0: ee OT |e
i Ran 00-T eR pOS eal IOJ Sane sie |
*TOYOM “BQ ST Bi a 00-7 a eae ee ursoyy | -dvos utso
TWAIVA UIA OFNIIP {sanoy omy jog “Ad Ty "SZO 0g: ee +) TO UBL soul
ce gare, 4 09- ‘ * Bpog osneg +] * WQSue1}s TensQ
“ 8 «s I OF-Z . e . « . uIsoy
«cc eT “i fT 0°-F re ey tar mud n i —
‘SMMOY OA} [LOG «| Or “3r | one eae GR! 4 vis | Pig ais 8 marie
‘Sq 9 ‘sq ig | 00-6 if add gy MEET ve ae | ie as
a "IVOTO TIT} OJNIIp you op | ‘syd i aie 08: > 8% seraouttry \
Wad O[IYM XIU JOU Op { 107BM ‘dl t ie | OT. Paes _ !epogrne *q}5ueqjs jens 68
ULIVAL OT}IIT B dpactol ee “« F ZI ers ee i vet bere pi
. "S10 FZ oa Og: grote
1IV9[9 [[T} 9}N[Ip you oO re ¢ ; i li doo
pela vere Od t "a0" + 80: * oyvUOgirg ean yysuoys [ens load
“ULIVAL OTIYA XTUL JOU . ; a : a Oe ie ws PS i pia
: I I eT 00-2 ‘ * * *9u0qsen IO} Sus vV
op :Ajozeredos oyvys pus oaossiq op a é CUT ae a out | ‘ : 9 re > cll
‘Sql F ‘ay & Ce. - + © ouoqsong | YjSuerjs [ensQ
HUIXIUL LOZ SUOTOOITCT aes 10g PES ae a "4 10) log spUoIpaIsuy polisep 1SuI0149 omBN
I
CROSS-FERTILISATION OF FLORISTS’ FLOWERS. °05
CROSS-FERTILISATION OF FLORISTS’ FLOWERS,
By Mr. JAmes Dovuauas.
[Read August 10, 1897.]
Tuts is one of the most important matters connected with
gardening, for by cross-fertilisation all the beautiful Auriculas,
Carnations, Pinks, Gladioli, &c., have been produced ; although
until quite recent years the importance of the subject has not
been recognised, nor has any record, that I am aware of, been
kept, of the first attempt at hybridisation of any of our florists’
flowers, which in every case must have preceded cross-
fertilisation.
The selection of varieties, from seed of the original wild
parent, is a very slow process indeed, and but little would be
accomplished in a life-time in this way. Of course there are
exceptions. The Shirley Poppies, for instance, were produced
by selecting the most beautiful varieties in each year from a
sport of the original wild poppy of the fields, and in a very few
years the Rev. W. Wilks brought up to one of our meetings the
beautiful but fugacious flowers known as the Shirley Poppies.
On the other hand, take the garden Cineraria, well known as
one of the most showy of spring flowers for greenhouse culture.
I have grown the supposed original parent for four seasons, and
have kept the plants isolated so that no pollen from any other
Cineraria could touch the flowers; seed has been saved, seedlings
raised and flowered annually, but there is not yet any appreciable
variation from the original C. cruenta. In passing, I might
mention that it is much more difficult to obtain seed from
C. cruenta than it is to save it from the garden varieties. The
plant was figured in the ‘‘ Bot. Mag.’’ about a hundred years
ago, and the editor remarks that its seeds usually prove abortive.
But if the plant when in flower is fertilised with pollen from the
garden varieties, seed is produced more freely, and the prepotency
of the pollen parent is evident in the progeny, which comprises
many beautiful forms more like the pollen than the seed parent.
The question has not been determined whether the garden
varieties of the Cineraria have been obtained directly from
C. cruenta by selection, or whether they have been obtained by
cross-fertilisation with some other species. Some incline to one
206 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
view, some to the other ; I suspect cross-fertilising by some other
nearly-allied species gave the first varietal forms.
The Gladiolus is another favourite garden flower which hag
been much improved by cross-fertilisation. The late Dean
Herbert published a book on bulbs just sixty years ago, and
therein gives an interesting account of his efforts in cross-fertilis-
ing the Gladiolus. He made many crosses with distinct species,
which he has recorded in his book, but he did not advise his
readers to rest there. He says: “It isnot, however, by crossing
different species, or local varieties of plants only, that the culti-
vator may add to the beauty of his collection. Much may be
done, undoubtedly, by crossing judiciously the finest seminal
varieties of such plants as have already been improved in our
gardens, and are disposed to break into a multiplicity of forms
and colours.”’ Dean Herbert is undoubtedly right. It is by first
hybridising nearly-allied species, and then by saving seeds from
the progeny and selecting from the plants resulting therefrom,
that our garden favourites have been so greatly improved.
Whenever variation has once been obtained, cross-fertilisation
may be proceeded with to obtain further garden varieties.
It is thus that so much of beauty has been obtained in the
Carnation and other garden flowers by amateurs who make one
particular flower their study, and perseveringly work upon it year
after year, not disheartened by failure nor unduly elated by
success. I may be allowed to allude to the Rev. F. D. Horner
as an Auricula specialist, Mr. Martin R. Smith as a lover of Car-
nations, and. the Rev. G. H. Engleheart who has taken such
infinite pains with the Narcissus. These gentlemen, and others
like them, have, by years of perseverance, accomplished each a
work that may last for generations yet unborn.
I know something of the Carnation myself, and have watched
the progress made by Mr. Martin R. Smith, in his garden at
Hayes. There is an accurate record kept of the result of all the
various crosses, and much knowledge of a permanent kind has
thus been treasured up for future use.
The old florists did good work in their days. Take the
Carnation, for instance. I find it is stated in Rea’s “ Flora,”
published in 1676, that many fine varieties had already gone out
of existence or had been pushed aside for new and improved
varieties. Rea enumerates 860 varieties of Carnations in culti-
CROSS-FERTILISATION OF FLORISTS’ FLOWERS. S07
vation 221 years ago. These, of course, have long since passed
away, having been replaced by other and doubtless improved
forms produced by florists, who have left us the results of their
work, but have given us no indication whatever as to how it was
done. But we have evidence that quite as good varieties of the
Show or Flaked Carnation were in existence 110 years ago as we
have in our gardens now. Thereisaplate of Franklin’s ‘ Tartar’
published in Curtis’s “Bot. Mag.’ in 1787. I showed this
coloured figure to Mr. B. Simonite of Sheffield, the leading northern
raiser and grower of this class of Carnations, and he was com-
pelled to admit that no finer variety of this class was now in
existence.
Mr. Martin R. Smith has informed me that he has learned
from his own work at Hayes that the pollen parent has more
influence in giving colour and form to the resultant seedling
than has the seed parent. He says, ‘‘ The prepotency of the
pollen parent is beyond doubt,” although I observed, in looking
over his numerous experiments, that it was not invariably so;
as will be seen from the two following tables, which I have
drawn up from his notes and records. My own experience is
somewhat similar; and I have come to the conclusion that not
only in the Carnation, but in all other florists’ flowers, we
must choose as a seed-bearer a plant with good habit, sound
and vigorous constitution, and the variety from which the
pollen is taken should possess flowers of fine form and of
decided colours, all the better, of course, if the plant possesses
a good habit and sound constitution also.
In sending the notes from which the tables on pages 208 and
209 have been compiled Mr. Martin Smith writes :—‘“ They are the
result of observations since 1892, but I fear they are of a very
negative character. Unfortunately the evidence on one side, viz.,
the prepotency of the female parent, must always be tainted by
suspicion, for if the characteristics of the male parent are entirely
absent it is so easy to urge that ‘ the cross was not a true one.’
I can only say that we take the greatest care. We keep all bees
out of the houses and never mark a cross as ‘sure’ unless the
flower collapses within the proper time. When my records began,
however, we were not so careful as we are now, and the bees had
access to the flowers ; thus a cross may have given evidence of
its being ‘sure’ by the collapse of the bloom, but we had no
-
908 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
assurance that a bee might not have done the work five minutes
before we fertilised the bloom. Taking, however, the general
average I am certain that the great preponderance of flowers
crossed and marked as ‘sure’ are really so, the evidence being
often given by the habit and foliage when not apparent in the
flowers of the produce. One very strong bit of evidence in favour
of your theory is given by the crosses on ‘Germania.’ Now
Germania is a flower of tremendous individuality, and if any
flower in existence could transmit its peculiarities to its descend-
ants it would be Germania; and yet you will find that Germania
is swamped by the individuality of the pollen parent in the great
majority of cases. I hardly ever get a yellow from Germania
TABLE I._SHOWING PREPONDERANCE OF MALE PARENT. |
Seed parent
Germania .
”
Sigurd (buff) .
Remembrance
Audrey Campbell
The Beau (buff) .
Alice Ayres ..
Winifred (buff) .
Almira... +. .«
Warocque .
Scarlet seedling .
Corunna (yellow)
Pollen parent
Sir B. Seymour .
A maroon .
Marnie
(scarlet) <5.) % ue
Golden Rain (yellow
ground fancy) .
Mrs. Vernon Har-
court :
Abigail (rose) .
Murray
Ariadne a
Madame A. Waroc-
que (Malmaison) .
Pink Malmaison .
Several purples .
Germania .
”
Lady Gwendoline
Germania .
4 ert oe
Rose Wynne (crim-
son maroon)
Pink Malmaison .
Almira .
Duke of Orleans. . |
Hayes’ Scarlet .
Remarks on produce
All the produce took after male
parent.
Nearly all the produce maroon,
4 out of 5 were white.
Produce took after the male,
5 searlets, 1 maroon.
Rose, apricot, or buff barred
with rose.
Produce scarlet, crimson,and rose.
Produce buffs and some rose.
Yellow not represented exc. by
buffs and buff ground fancies,
produce giving every variety of
scarlet, crimson, and rose.
Produce mainly maroon,
white.
4 yellow, 2 buff, and 1 white.
All yellow ground picotees and
fancies.
1 white, 1 rose, 1 scarlet.
4 yellow, 2 buff.
1 yellow buff.
and
Produce mainly maroon.
4 pink, 1 yellow ground picotee.
Nearly all buff, flaked and barred
with crimson.
2 yellow, 1 buff, 1 crimson,
2 white, 1 scarlet.
CROSS-FERTILISATION OF FLORISTS’ FLOWERS.
209
TABLE I1.—DOUBTFUL OR SHOWING PREPONDERANCE OF
FEMALE PARENT.
Seed parent
Germania. .
Hayes’ Scarlet .
any « <« - -
Lord Sefton
(crim. fl. maroon)
Governor , . .
Madame Van
Houtte . .
Ella Murray
(maroon fi. crim.)
Tournament .
Countess of Jersey
Abigail. . .
Spy (white) .
Warocque. .
Agnes Chambers
Ariadne (chaundy)
G. C. Murray
(scarlet). .
Mrs. Muir.
Favourite (pic.) .
”?
Mephisto", .
Favourite (pic.) .
Rose Wynne,
crim. maroon .
Corunna <« « «
Pollen parent
King of Scarlets.
Duke of Orleans.
Germania...
Pink Malmaison .
Hayes’ Scarlet
Germania. . «
Mephisto
Germania .
Abigail (rose) .
Germania .
Warocque .
Germania .
Hayes’ Scarlet
Germania. . .
King of Scarlets.
Germania . .
Port Light (scarlet)
Remarks on produce
2 yellow ground picotees, 1
yellow self.
2 white, 2 scarlet.
or buffs,
2 rose. No trace of yellow,
No yellows
4 white, 1 maroon, 3 yellow or
buff.
1 yellow, 1 buff, 2 rose, 1 crimson.
. | All took clearly after the mother.
. | 8 all following mother. No trace
of father.
4 yellow ground fancies, 1 rose self.
4 yellow ground fancies.
2 white, 1 pink, 2 apricot, 1
yellow ground picotee.
3 white, 2 rose.
Kvery sort of colour, the nearest
approach to yellow being buffs,
self or flaked, and crimson. Al-
most all take after mother, and
all very vigorous except those
showing trace of father, such
as apricots, buffs, &c., which
are distinctly of weaker con-
stitution.
2 yellow grd. picotees or fancies.
3scarlet,3rose. Notrace of father.
4 white, 9 all colours, but not
one with trace of father.
3 white, one of them blush.
6, not one with a trace of father.
4 white ground picotees, and 1
white self. No trace of father,
1 purple, 2 dark maroon, 2 buff,
1 blush white.
2 picotees.
4 maroon selfs. No trace of
_ father.
3 yellow, 1 scarlet.
worth having. I get plenty, but when IdoI find them, as arule,
pure reproductions on a most feeble scale of the mother, and I
always regard them as products of Germania self-fertilised, and
not a true cross.”
910 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
The Auricula is a flower that I have carefully cultivated and
crossed with the intention of producing seedlings superior to the
parents; but I must confess that no better opportunity could be
afforded to anyone who keenly desires to practise patience than
by attempting to raise Show Auriculas.
The Show Auricula, as some of you are aware, is divided
into four classes—viz., Green-edge, Grey-edge, White-edge, and
Selfs. The Green-edge has the margin of the corolla green,
without any spot or symptom of farina. Next to this margin of
green is a ring or band of dark maroon; some are almost black.
The centre is white, caused by a very dense coating of white
farina; and the mouth of the corolla is a bright deep yellow.
The Auricula fancier knows the points of his flower, and if
desirous of producing a new variety with a green edge, he takes
the two best he can get and cross-fertilises them. The process
is first to remove the anthers from the intended seed-bearer
before the pollen cases burst. After two or three days the pollen
should be carried on a small brush, and placed on the stigmatic
part of the intended seed-bearer. This is done three days in
succession, and generally a cross is effected. The young and
ardent florist may fancy he is to have a fine lot of Green-edged
Auriculas, but if his expectations are high they will soon have a
fall. Not one in ten will have a pure green edge, and if he gets a
really good one out of 500 seedlings he may rest and be thankful ;
and that he may not be too overjoyed at even this limited success,
it may be as well to add that a good seedling will not always
retain its first promise of high-class quality, but often sadly
degenerates after the first year’s bloom. On one occasion, some
twenty-five years ago, I cross-fertilised a fine Grey-edged Auricula,
‘ George Lightbody,’ with pollen from ‘Smiling Beauty,’ a fine
white- or grey-edged variety. There were about 1,000 seedlings
flowered from this attempt. I saved about half-a-dozen pro-
mising varieties for further trial, but they had to be discarded
one after another until only one remained; but it is still culti-
vated by amateurs under the name of ‘Silvia.’ Some years
afterwards I made another successful cross with the best green-
edged forms, and after a very nearly similar weeding-out, I
produced ‘Abbe Liszt,’ which is considered one of the best
ereen-edged varieties.
Of course, the seedling-raiser of any type of florists’ flower
CROSS-FERTILISATION OF FLORISTS’ FLOWERS. 911
must have a standard of excellence before him, and the qualities
or points he aims at must be in the parents; in both, if possible,
but certainly in the pollen parent. Those intending to begin the
culture of any florists’ flower, and wishing to produce seedlings,
will find the points of quality faithfully described in a recent
publication of this Society entitled ‘‘ Rules for Judging.”
Another point I would like to bring forward, and, if possible,
would like to have some discussion upon, is whether there is a
‘point beyond which we can no further go. I not only believe
there is, but bring some evidence in support of my contention.
There is a picture of a bizarre Carnation taken by Sydenham
Edwards 110 years ago; and the leading grower and raiser of
this class of Carnation assures me that it is not yet surpassed.
The Grey-edged Auricula ‘George Lightbody’ was raised from
cross-fertilised seed fifty or sixty years ago, and cultivators north
and south have been trying ever since to raise a better grey-edge,
but have not succeeded in so doing. I do not for one moment
allege that we can go no further in any direction with either
Carnations or Auriculas. For in Self and Fancy Carnations, and
Yellow-ground Picotees, there is still much to be done before
any flower can be named perfection; but in some directions,
notably in those I have mentioned, it almost seems as if we
could not advance further. All the more reason that we should
branch out in new directions, and continue to work on steadily
and perseyeringly in those directions where improvement is mani-
festly still possible.
It is not altogether easy work, for, besides the difficulty in
raising new varieties better than the old, there are so many
insect pests and fungoid diseases which must be fought and con-
quered. Our Carnations have the wire-worm boring the stem
below ground, and the maggot above ground. Fungoid diseases,
in winter of one kind, and another species insummer. The
Auriculas have the woolly aphis, which is more than enough,
and the Hollyhock is decimated year after year by a horrible
fungus which attacks the leaves, and follows the plant every-
where. I verily-believe if Hollyhock seed was taken and sown
in Nova Zembla or in Patagonia the Puccimia malvacearum
would be found ready waiting toattackthe plants. But nothing
daunts the enthusiastic amateur or the real lover of plants; his
failures or successes are but stepping-stones to the point upon
212 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
which he has set his mind, and his motto is Labor omnia
vincit.
DISCUSSION.
Dr. Masters, F.R.S., drew attention to the coincidence that
at the very time when Mr. Douglas was reading his paper a
statue was being unveiled at Shrewsbury to the memory of
Charles Darwin, and reminded the meeting of the great value
and importance of the experiments and investigations with regard
to the fertilisations of plants which Mr. Darwin had made.
Darwin, he said, had been one of the first to point out the
significance attending the slightest variations observed in plants,
and he placed great emphasis on the fact that they were none of
them the outcome of mere whim or caprice, but afforded evidence
of the greatest possible value to students inquiring into the laws
of design, environment, &c., as they affected plant life.
Mr. A. DEAN advised using seedlings from Germania as pollen
parents in crossing Germania, as he fancied that a better Ger-
mania could only be obtained by either self-fertilisation or by
crossing with its own produce, or possibly with some other good
yellow.
Mr. CotvinLe Brown stated that he had raised a great many
seedling carnations from Italian seed, which all produced single
flowers the first season of flowering, but that many of these
became semi-double the next season, and quite double the next.
Mr. JENKINS, referring to the supposed prepotency of the —
pollen parent, said that he had crossed two of the best white
flowers, and the seed so obtained produced flowers of almost all
colours, even some scarlets among them.
Mr. Dovauas, replying, mentioned that ‘‘ Purple Emperor”
was obtained from two white wire-edged picotees which had
been crossed with a view of getting white ground picotees. He
also said that for a single-flowering carnation to develop into a
double one, was quite the vice versd of his experience.
THE PLUM. 913
THE PLUM.
By Mr. A. H. Pearson, F.R.H.S.
[Read August 24, 1897.]
I po not intend to say much about the origin of our cultivated
plums, as this must be, ina great measure, a matter of conjecture.
Some of the plums we cultivate are sub-species. Our Bullace is
the Prunus insititia of botanists, and our Damson doubtless
originates from the same source; our Cherry plumis the Prunus
myrobalana, and there are several varieties, such as the Early
Mirabelle, St. Etienne, Queen of Mirabelles, and Rivers’ Early
Prolific, which are of the same race. It is the generally received
opinion that the bulk of our varieties have sprung from Prunus
domestica, but I think we may take it that the blood of more
than one species is found in the plums which we cultivate to-day,
for we find that varieties closely resembling one another in every
respect, demand different stocks for their well-being when
propagated by grafting.
The plum is one of the most valuable of our hardy fruits,
and, if well managed, one of the most profitable to grow; it will
thrive in almost any soil, and one finds plum-orchards producing
fine crops of fruit upon strong clay, and also upon light gravels,
chalk, and even sand; so that the range of soils upon which
plums may be planted is an extremely wide one. Time will not
allow me to speak of the best aspect and conditions for planting
plums; suffice it to say that although they bloom early and are
benefited by shelter from cold east winds, and enjoy a good aspect
as well as any other fruit tree, they are not so very particular in
this respect, and even so far north as Clydesdale we find that
the orchards planted on a northern slope are said to succeed
better than those with a southern exposure. Plums rejoice in a
moist soil, but wili not thrive in a wet undrained situation ;
indeed, all fruit trees are impatient of stagnant water in the soil.
The demand for plums is very great, and when this fruit is in
the market most others areata discount. Much has been written
and said about over-production and glutted markets; so far as my
experience extends there is always a market for good fruit, and
this remark applies to plums quite as strongly as to apples and
914 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
other fruits. Of course the plum isa perishable fruit, and cannot
be stored, but I hope to show that by careful management such
losses as we sometimes hear of may be avoided; certainly so long
as our continental neighbours are kind enough to make us an
annual present (by bounties) of some £2,000,000 to take their pro-
duction of sugar, we ought to be able to make jams at such a
cheap rate as to secure us a monopoly in the markets of the
world. |
PROPAGATION.—The natural method of propagation is by seed,
and this is, of course, the only way in which new varieties can
be obtained. We have not a very complete record of the raisers
of the varieties of plums which are at present in cultivation ;
some of them were raised generations ago, when but comparatively
little interest was taken in these matters, and many more have
been introduced from abroad. The home of most of the new
varieties raised in this country is Sawbridgeworth, and Mr. Rivers
has raised and distributed more than perhaps any other person.
No list of good plums could be made without including such
varieties as the Czar, Monarch, Early Transparent, and Early
Prolific ; all of which, with many others, were raised at Saw-
bridgeworth. America has furnished us with several valuable
varieties, of which I need only mention Jefferson (Judge Bush),
and Denniston’s superb (Isaac Denniston), to show our indebted-
ness to that country. Coe’s Golden Drop (Jervaise Coe), was
raised at Bury St. Edmunds, Kirke’s Plum (Jos. Kirke) at
Brompton, and Diamond (Hooker) in Kent; the bulk of the
Gages seem to have originated in France. Most varieties were
doubtless chance seedlings; in the days of our grandfathers
planters seemed to think it was cheaper to raise seedlings than
to buy trees, and many of our old orchards in this country abound
in seedlings both of plums and apples (especially the latter), and
from out of this chaos there would doubtless emerge from time
to time some novelty worthy of propagation. To-day one does
not think of raising seedlings except with the view of obtaining
new varieties, for although some sorts, such as Green Gage,
reproduce themselves fairly true from seed, the bulk of seedlings
would be greatly inferior to existing varieties, and as they are
more vigorous in their growth than grafted trees, they would be
longer in coming into bearing. A second method of raising
young trees is by planting suckers; the plum, being a surface-
THE PLUM. 915
rooting tree, is naturally inclined to throw up suckers, and this
habit is taken advantage of by market growers in various parts of
the country, for instance, in the Vale of Evesham the “‘ Pershore”’
Plum is almost always raised from suckers, as is the “‘ Johnny
Roe ” in Nottinghamshire, and the Damson in Cheshire. Trees
grown in this way are greatly inferior to worked trees, they are
difficult to form into shapely specimens, and the tendency to
throw up suckers is increased by this method of propagation ;
they are also longer in coming into bearing. Mr. Rivers says
that ‘‘ Rivers’ Early Prolific,” when raised from suckers, does
not bloom for several years, whereas worked trees bloom the
second year. In the market gardens of Nottinghamshire one
often finds huge trees of Mussel and Brussels Plums, which have
been taken as suckers from trees worked upon these stocks, and
which are really only cumber-grounds, as the fruit is of little
value.
The best method of propagation is by budding or grafting;
the former is preferable as the union of the stock and bud is
closer and more natural than that of a graft, and in the case of
plums, not so liable to cause gumming. With respect to the
stocks used for working, one finds that in many nurseries, both
in this country and on the Continent, two or at most three stocks
do duty for all the varieties of plums grown, whereas in other
nurseries six kinds of stocks are used, viz., the Common Plum,
the Brussels, the Mussel, the Brompton, the Damas Noir or
St. Julien, and the Myrobalan; the origin of some of these stocks
is unknown, but that they are of different races would seem
apparent from the fact that some cultivated varieties prefer one,
some another, whilst a few are acceptable to nearly all, and it
seems to me that the secret of success is to work the stock with a
variety which is of common parentage, or which atleast has the
same bloodinit. Let me explain my meaning by anillustration.
Nearly all plums will grow upon the Common Plum stock, although
some of them thrive much better upon other stocks. ‘ Prince
Unegelbert”’ and “ Black Diamond,” both large dark plums, succeed
well upon the Mussel stock, whereas upon the Brompton they
grow for a while and then part company at the graft; the union
never seems complete. ‘ Dove Bank,’’ on the other hand, flour-
ishes upon both Brompton and Brussels, but will not grow upon
the Mussel. “Belgian Purple” will not grow upon either Brussels
216 JOURNAI, OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
or Common Plum, but flourishes upon Damas Noir, Mussel, or
Myrobalan. This brings me back to the idea previously thrown
out, that our cultivated plums cannot be all of common descent,
or they would probably all thrive upon the same stock. To many
people this subject of stocks may seem a matter of small moment,
but it is one which frequently carries resuits that are far from
pleasing. For example, an acquaintance of mine bought 250
damsons for planting in the North of England; they proved to
be worked upon a stock which is not hardy in the north, and
although they were fine trees, they were killed by a severe winter,
two years after planting. My father once purchased a number
of damsons, worked upon the Mussel stock, and, although they
appeared to be good trees, they all dwindled away year by year
and had to be replanted. I will not go further into detail, but it
must be obvious that this is a matter of importance, and it is ‘one
which in some quarters has been much neglected by propagators.
Before leaving this subject I may just say that the one stock
needed by all cultivators is areal dwarfing stock, which, for the
plum, would correspond with the ‘ Quince ”’ for pears, and the
“ Paradise’’ for apples; such a stock is yet undiscovered, and is
much to be desired; of course some of the stocks I have named
will carry trees of much more vigorous habit than others, and
the intelligent nurseryman does not dream of using the same
stock for his trained wall and espalier trees as that which he uses
for standard trees; at the same time the difference is not so great
as we could wish, and a really dwarfing stock would be a great
boon.
BupDING is done about July, when the bark will run readily
from the stock and the buds are sufficiently ripe. I need not go
into the detail of the operation, as everyone is conversant with
it, but I may say in passing that no matter how well the buds
are put in, unless they are properly tied afterwards and a wrap
of the tying material passed just above the bud, so as to properly
hold together the lips of the incision on the stock, the result
will be failure. If buds are inserted too early they will in all
probability make growth the same season (which is undesirable),
and if inserted too late there is great difficulty in getting them in
properly, and very few will grow ; what is needed is just a suffi-
cient movement of sap to permit of the bark running freely and to
nourish the newly inserted bud, without exciting it into growth.
A "|
THE PLUM. 217
In a showery season, when the stocks are swelling after budding,
care must be taken to loosen the ties before they cut into the
stock, but theyshould not be removed altogether, or the buds,
being dormant, will be thrust out. This is often a cause of
serious loss; the,ties should be taken off and replaced, wrapping
and tying lightly.
GraFTiInG is done in the spring, and, as a rule with propa-
gators, is only made use of to make good the failure amongst
stocks which were budded the preceding summer; of course,
where it is desirable to re-work trees of some age, grafting is the
means to employ, but the plum does not lend itself to this
operation like the pear and apple, and the results are seldom
satisfactory.
I may just say whilst upon the subject of grafting, that I
have searched a good many authorities upon this question, and
they almost all recommend that the cuttings to be used as grafts
should be in as dormant a state as possible; most of them say
that they should be cut off in December or January, and taken
care of until required. With one exception, which I will give,
the whole of the authorities, both new and old, that I have con-
sulted, are agreed upon this point—dormant they must be. But
does this well-received statementrest upon any solid foundation ?
For fifty years we have discarded it at Chilwell, and my fore-
man (who has been with us forty-two years) tells me that his
predecessor always took his cuttings.as he was ready for them,
excepting of course in seasons when the weather was very mild
and buds began to develop too much, in which case he cut them
off, and buried them in a cool place for a few days, but never for
more than a week, or at the outside a fortnight, before grafting.
Again, one reads that when it is necessary to rework old trees,
the stocks should be headed back early in the winter to prevent
the movement of the sap; this is manifestly absurd, as the endof
the branches so cut back would dry up, and it would be impossible
to insert grafts unless they were again cut back some 12 inches
to get fresh wood. I was so muchimpressed with the constantly
reiterated advice to have one’s grafts in a dormant state, that I
made the experiment one year of having them cut off a month
before they were required, and laid in damp sand until the
time for grafting ; unfortunately, like some other experimentalists,
I started on a large scale, and the result was most disastrous ;
F
218 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
we had the worst failure that we have ever known with the pre-
pared grafts, whereas those taken in the usual way were as good —
as need be. I have already said I found one exception to the
advocates for early cutting and retarding grafts; in M. Edward
Pynaert’s book, “ L’Amateur du Fruit,” he quotes from the writ-
ings of M. Carriere, a Belgian amateur, to the effect that contrary
to the usual practice he never cuts his grafts until the moment
when he wishes to use them, and the only case in which he
would use grafts, other than freshly cut, is when one receives them
at a time when it is not possible to use them immediately, or
when the work has unavoidably to be done very late. It is
needless to state that this question of dormant grafts applies to
all kinds of fruit trees which are usually propagated by grafting.
Passing from the subject of propagation to that of planting
and subsequent management, we find that as a rule plums suc-
ceed best when grown in an unrestricted form; they are im-
patient of close pruning, under which treatment they frequently
gum, consequently most market growers plant them as bushes
or half-standards, and after cutting back the shoots for a couple
of years, so as to form well-balanced trees, they leave them, so
far as pruning is concerned, severely alone. In our gardens we
frequently see closely-pruned pyramids, but rarely do these carry
fruit, for the plum, being somewhat rampant in its growth, when
closely pruned makes strong shoots at the expense of fruit buds ;
the only remedy is to lift trees which are required for pyramids
several times whilst young, and thus check the root action and
throw them into bearing, and under this treatment and with a
favourable climate the finest quality of fruit can be grown. From
the Trent to the Lowlands of Scotland all the best varieties of
plums require and deserve a wall to bring them to perfection ;
many of our old gardens are provided with fine walls, and a few
are covered with fine trees, but in the majority of old gardens
which it has been my lot to see, the wall trees (more especially
in the case of plums) can only by courtesy be culled trained
trees. It is true that the stems are fastened in some way to the
wall, but the spurs are so far away as to be almost outside any
beneficial effect of the radiated heat therefrom, and, as a rule, if
the wall be of moderate height the lower half of the tree upon
it is devoid of spurs, and the larger part of the whole tree is
above the wall altogether. I have seen wires placed above the
THE PLUM. 219
wall and the shoots trained thereon carrying an excellent crop of
fruit, but one could scarcely call this “wall fruit.” The reason
of this state of things is, first, the naturally strong growth of
the plum ; and, secondly, the method of training. This is usually
the ‘‘ fan” system, in which the shoots are trained at a natural
angle to the stem of the tree, and which, consequently, permits
the sap to follow its natural course of rushing up into the leading
shoots ; this can easily be obviated by adopting the ‘horizontal ”
method of training, which by laying the shoots at right angles
to the stem of the tree checks the flow of the sap and causes
them to make fruit spurs ; this system has also the great advan-
tages of covering the wall from base to summit, instead of wast-
ing the lower portion, and of disposing the branches at equal
distances from each other over their whole length instead of
being overcrowded at their base, as in the case of fan-trained
trees. Being the first propagator to recommend and distribute
horizontally-trained plum trees, | would say that they are in
every way as well adapted for this form of culture as the pear or
apple, and just as it is now quite the exception to find these
latter trained for walls or espaliers in any other way than hori-
zontally, so I believe in the near future will it be quite the
exception to find a fan-trained plum. It will occur to everyone
that these remarks upon training apply with special force to
those walls which are of a medium height, say 7 to 10 feet,
but they also apply to higher walls, inasmuch as a large propor-
tion of the space is wasted when it has nothing upon it but
naked stems ; it will also be apparent that the so-called hori-
zontally-trained trees which are grown in France, and which
some cultivators have adopted in this country, which have their
branches trained at an angle of some 45° from the stem, do not
check the flow of sap, and thus cause fertility, in the way that
training at right angles to the stem does, and that beyond the
fact of their branches being equidistant at all parts, they have no
advantages over fan-trained trees. J may say in passing that
the pruning of the side shoots upon trained trees is better done
with the finger and thumb, in the way of pinching young
growths, than by the subsequent use of the knife.
It is not possible in a paper like the present to go fully into
the details of pruning, training, and management of the plum,
but I have selected a few points which I conceived to be of
F 2
220 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
interest, mainly from the fact that they differ in some measure
from the usually accepted methods. I will therefore break off
here, and say a few words about the habits of certain varieties
and on general management. Plums are, as a rule, very prolific,
and the heaviest cropping varieties have the habit of carrying
enormous crops every alternate year, thus causing an over-
abundant supply one season and a dearth the next; fortunately —
this does not always occur over the whole country at the same
time, or the result would be serious, still this habit has to a
certain extent deterred market-growers from planting this fruit —
as extensively as they otherwise would have done. Itis generally
said that spring frost is the cause of these frequent failures, but
it is undoubtedly often the result of over-exhaustion from the
excessive crop carried the previous year; and when by any
natural cause the crop is reduced by one half, the trees will
carry fruit the succeeding year without taking a season’s rest.
Many people are fully aware of this fact, and yet but few, com-
paratively, make any use of their knowledge. A market-grower
in my neighbourhood told me some time ago that for many
years he had thinned all the fruit on his plum trees, and that he
never did anything which paid him so well. He commenced one
season when the trees were so laden that the branches resembled
ropes of onions, and removed more than half the fruit just before
the stones began to harden; this green fruit he took to market,
and it was eagerly bought up for cooking and preserving; the
money he realised well repaid his labour. Then when the fruit
was ripe, and the market was “ glutted’’ with undersized, ill-
coloured fruit, the hucksters actually quarrelled to obtain his fine
well-coloured fruit, and pulled his baskets out of the carts before
he could unload—this bears out my statement that there is
always a market for good fruit. Furthermore he said that the
following year his neighbours just over the hedge had their ill-
developed and half-starved bloom destroyed by frost, whilst his
came through the ordeal in safety, and he had quite enough
left to give an excellent crop. I quote this to show what may
be done on a large scale, and of course such practice is even still
more applicable to private gardens; no doubt very many
gardeners regularly thin their fruit in the manner indicated, but,
alas, one’s observation compels one to say that many more never —
attempt it. Before leaving the subject of market-growers, and
THE PLUM. 221
that nightmare called ‘ glutted markets,’’ I would just point out
that one cause of glutted markets is to be found in the fact that
planters have confined themselves too much to one or two
varieties of plums. In the Midlands and South of Scotland I
should say that ninety Victorias are planted as against ten of
any other variety, with the result that the fruit often makes a
poor price, whilst a week or so before and after Victorias are in
the market, plums sell well. Again much may be done to
improve the quality of the fruit grown, both by thinning, as
already mentioned, and also by feeding the trees, when they have
a full crop, with mulchings of manure. I would suggest also the
feasibility of establishing, close to the fruit-grounds, jam-making
factories (either by individual or co-operative enterprise), where,
favoured with our cheap sugar, the surplus fruit could be utilised
and subsequently sold at a profit, instead of being rushed off to
London and sold at such a price as will not cover cost of trans-
port and agents’ commission. These factories have been
successfully established in many districts, and will doubtless
extend in course of time. Fruit-pulp is also made and sold by
auction. In March last, at Lenham, near Maidstone, amongst
other prices realised, damson pulp made 40s. a ton, Victoria plum
up to 87s. 6d., greengage 50s., raspberry £19, and black currant
£45,
In giving a few descriptions of plums and their habits, it must
of course be understood that I speak of them as they demean
themselves in the Midlands, for some varieties which fail with
us are most valuable in the more favoured Southern counties.
Tt would be out of place to attempt a catalogue, and I shall only
mention briefly our leading varieties. The heaviest croppers
and those most usually selected for market planting are
Rivers’ Early Prolific, The @zar, Victoria, Diamond, Prince
KEnglebert, and Monarch. Rivers’ Early is perhaps the most
profitable of any plum (where it will succeed), from the fact of
its early season, and also that there are so many soils and
situations where it is quite useless to plant it. The other varieties
named are all heavy bearers, and will flourish in almost any
soil. In addition to these, Caledonian or Goliath, Mrs. Gisborne,
Pond’s Seedling, and Sultan are all reliable culinary varieties,
succeeding well as standards. Orleans and Cox’s Kmperor are
heavy bearers, but liable to crack in wet seasons; they do best
229, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
on warm soils; Prince of Wales, which belongs to the same family, —
we have long discarded from its being so tender: in severe
winters both old and young trees are often killed. White
Magnum Bonum is a fine fruit, and in some localities a good
orchard plum, but with us it does not produce a crop oftener
than every third year upon an average. Johnny Roe, previously
mentioned, is a large, coarse, reddish-purple plum of poor
quality; but, being a great cropper, is largely grown in Notting-
hamshire; the fruit is sent off to the ‘‘ Black Country,’ where
possibly they have nothing better.
Our best dessert plums in the open are Jefferson, Karly Trans-
parent, and Dove Bank. Jefferson is one of the best all-round
plums we possess, and many growers would name Dove Bank as
a suitable companion ; the Prwt Manual and other authorities
say that this variety is synonymous with Caledonian—as they say
Sharpe’s Emperor is synonymous with Victoria—the reason of
this is that they have not seen the true variety, and even to-
day many cultivators supply Caledonian for Dove Bank. The
true variety was grown and distributed by Spencer, of Ilkeston,
the raiser of “ Spencer’s Favourite’”’ apple, and is said to have
been found growing on the banks of the Derbyshire Dove; it
differs from Caledonian in growth, and whereas the leaf-glands
of that variety are well developed and red in colour, Dove
Bank has small ill-developed glands of a pale colour; with
regard to the fruit there is no comparison between the two.
Caledonian is a somewhat coarse cooking plum, Dove Bank is
a splendid cooking plum, and good enough for dessert. Sharpe’s
Emperor, just referred to, is a second-rate plum, resembling
Victoria in appearance, but very inferior in point of cropping
and quality, a decided clingstone, often gumming at the stone, and
ripening a fortnight later than its supposed synonym, not worthy
of cultivation. Early Transparent is a most abundant cropper, and
does well in all forms. Green Gage succeeds best where some
chalk is present in the soil; in most parts of the Midlands it
carries a good crop in the open once in six years.
I see in a recent work upon fruits the name of Washington
plum amongst the culinary varieties, and the same thing occurs
in the report of the Plum Congress, Edinburgh, 1889. This must
surely be a mistake, for when this variety favours us with a
crop it is most delicious. I am quite unable to say how often
THE PLUM. 223
it crops in the open, but I have known a very large tree in one
of our orchards for thirty years, and only once has it been my
pleasure to taste the fruit from it; one year in the seventies it
was full, and I spent most of an afternoon in its shade; my
foreman says it also bore a crop about the time I was in short
clothes, but with these two exceptions it has been resting, so
that one may expect it to attain a vigorous old age.
In the craze which has prevailed of late years for everything
large in the way of fruit, some of the smaller varieties have been
somewhat overlooked. I think of this class St. Etienne, Queen
of Mirabelles, and Wine Sour, are well worthy of notice. The
two former are pretty little yellow plums ripening in July and
early August, very acceptable for dessert, and most delicious as
bottled fruit. Wine Sour, as all connoisseurs know, is without a
rival for preserving.
The plums I have hitherto named all succeed as standards
in the open, although many of them are well worthy of a
position on a wall, but those usually selected for walls are as
follows: Coe’s Golden Drop, which is perhaps our best plum for
this mode of culture, closely followed in point of merit by Den-
niston’s Superb, Kirke’s, and Jefferson, all of which are of the
highest quality and heavy bearers; Early Transparent Gage is
also most fertile and of good flavour; Green Gage, Bryanston,
Reine Claude de Bavay, and Reine Claude Violette, are all excel-
lent, but not quite such sure croppers; the foregoing are all
worthy of a south or south-west wall.
I would say here that it seems to me incomprehensible that
planters should persist in planting such plums as Victoria on a
south wall, where they are quite out of place and the fruit they
produce is so “ mealy’’ as to be almost uneatable, and yet one
sees hundreds of them in this position; on a north or east wall
they do well. Space forbids my giving lists for each aspect, nor
can I mention more varieties; I might easily extend the list, but
have confined my remarks to the cream of those kinds grown in
the Midlands. I must, however, say a word about a plum which
has, at a somewhat recent date, been honoured by an award from
this Society ; I refer to Early Favourite. This variety has been
before the public for nearly forty years, and has been discarded
by nearly every cultivator on account of its extreme shyness; |
think, therefore, a note of caution is not out of place.
we7
994 : JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
I have reserved the Damsons for a word to themselves; from
a profitable point of view I should certainly not have placed them ~
last, for I know no fruit that, taking the average of seasons, pays
the same amount of money as the Damson. By far the most
popular variety in the Midlands is the Damascene, Cheshire,
Shropshire, or Prune, and many a cottager pays his rent year
by year from some half-dozen trees in his garden. The demand
for the fruit is very great; in seasons of great plenty the dyers
purchase them by the ton and—may we whisper it ?—‘‘Port wine”
is said to be manufactured therefrom; but apart from this there
is always a very large sale in our northern towns for cooking,
preserving, and bottling. The fruit ripens at a time when nearly
all other plums are over, and when fortunately our home-grown
fruit meets with no competition from abroad.
Damsons are grown in America, but they seem to be confined
to the English-speaking race, and I never heard of their being
grown on the Continent.
Bradley’s King of Damsons is an excellent variety, an early
and heavy bearer, of good quality, ripening a little earlier than
the Damascene, and will doubtless become a popular kind. The
famous Crittenden or Farleigh Prolific, the dwellers in the Mid-
lands will have none of, and although the nurseryman may
propagate, the planters will not purchase.
I have spoken of the Damascene as the Prune: it is some-
times called by this name, but it is, of course, quite distinct
from the true Herefordshire Prune, of the merits of which I
cannot as yet say much. Mr. Smith of Mentmore kindly sent
me some trees about twelve years ago, but although they have
grown freely and made fine trees, they have up to now failed to
produce fruit. At Mentmore I hear this variety crops well, and is
muchesteemed. Damsons are useful for planting on the outsides
of plum-orchards, as they form a good shelter from the wind for
the other trees.
It is generally conceded that all fruit-trees do better on
cultivated land than upon land which is grass, but the plum is,
perhaps, of all others essentially a fruit for cultivated orchards
or gardens. Where cattle have access to the trees they frequently
damage them to a serious extent. Plums should be gathered with
the aid of a step-ladder, or two ladders fastened together at the
top, for as the wood is brittle, a heavy ladder placed against the
THE PLUM. 295
trees will frequently break them, especially in a young plantation.
The fruit, when required for market, should be gathered before
it is fully ripe; great loss is frequently entailed by neglect of this
precaution, not only to the grower himself but also to other con-
signers, as fruit placed upon the market in bad condition has
always a tendency to lower the general prices. Where fruit can
be carefully gathered and conveyed by one’s own vehicle to
market, so as to preserve the bloom, it will always command an
extra price, and it is surprising that more pains are not taken by
the average grower upon these little points. It is scarcely
necessary to add that these remarks apply with still stronger
force to fruit grown for private use. If the trees are looked over
several times instead of gathering all the fruit at once, the season
of each variety is considerably prolonged. In gathering plums
for dessert, they should be pulled in the early morning whilst
cool and handled with the utmost care; when placed upon the
table they should be in dishes with only one layer of fruit resting
upon a few leaves. Presented in this way, with all their bloom
upon them, they are tempting to the most epicurean; but when
one sees them rubbed, shiny, and piled up into a pyramid, one
is apt to be reminded of the polished fruit one sees in the
markets, and to pass them by untasted.
I fear this paper has been somewhat lengthy, and also dis-
cursive, but it may be asked why, having touched upon so many
things, I have not said anything about new plums. With regard
to the newer varieties distributed in this country, we have a fair
number on trial, but I take it the consideration of their merits
or shortcomings falls rather within the scope of a paper upon
‘New Fruits” than in the present article. With regard to the
Japanese plums, I cannot say much from personal observation.
I purchased several varieties, but they succumbed to the severity
of our winters in less than two years ; the majority died the first
season, and the remainder dragged on an enfeebled existence,
until the next winter promptly ended their sufferings. Our
American friends speak very highly of “‘ Burbank” (a Japanese
variety imported by Mr. Luther Burbank), which they describe
as “‘ entirely hardy.’’ The fruit, as coloured in “ U.S.A. Depart-
ment of Agriculture’s Report upon Pomology,’”’ much resembles
“ Orleans,’ but is redder in colour. It remains to be seen
whether it is hardy in this country. Mr. Burbank, whose
996 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
experimental grounds are at Santa Rosa, California, has raised
a considerable number of hybrids between the American and
Japanese races of plums, and also some cross-bred prunes, which
he describes as of great merit. I cannot speak of any of them
from personal observation.
In conclusion, may I say a word about the value of the plum
for filling up gaps in old orchards. Most practical orchardists
know how useless it is to replant apple-trees on the site where
apples have been grown previously (though alas there are
hundreds, perhaps thousands, of trees condemned to a lingering
death each year for lack of this knowledge), whereas plums will
grow very well in such places if the land be fairly fertile. Ihave
omitted to say anything about the enemies of the plum; they
are not many, and most of them easy of conquest. Perhaps
from this very cause it arises that one so frequently sees the
trees at this season of the year smothered up with aphis. The
sluggard says they will do no harm, but the careful cultivator
knows full well that they will weaken the shoots, prevent their
ripening, and so destroy the chance of either fruit or good growth
in the coming season.
These rough notes, written down at odd moments in a busy
life, are offered, trusting they may be found to contain a few
practical truths, and that attention may be drawn to a fruit
which is at present somewhat neglected in our gardens.
NEPENTHES.
By Mr. Harry James Vertcu, F.L.S., F.R.GS., &e.
[Read September 7, 1897.)
I propose to deal with Nepenthes almost solely from a horti-
cultural standpoint. The part played in the economy of the
plant by those curious appendages of the leaves, to which we give
the name of pitchers; how they act as traps to decoy insects
and other small animals; how the bodies of these creatures are
decomposed by a fluid secreted from the walls of the pitcher ;
the chemical composition of this fluid, and the minute structure
of the apparatus that secretes it; all these and other interesting
NEPENTHES. 227
matters relating to Nepenthes have been so frequently and fully
treated by others, that on the present occasion they may be
altogether omitted, or only incidentally mentioned.
Probably no vegetable production more excited the wonder
of early travellers in the eastern equatorial region than the
Nepenthes, and the curious speculations indulged in respecting
the purpose of the pitchers may pardonably provoke a smile from
us who, with the aids and appliances of modern science, pride
vo
Ee)
Y4
SE
ey BE.
Fic. 43.—Nepentues greatly reduced to show habit of growth (Gardeners’ Chronicle).
ourselves on possessing a more accurate knowledge of their
structure and functions. The oldest recorded intimation of the
existence of these remarkable plants occurs in the “ Histoire de
la grande Tle de Madagascar,” by Etienne de Flacourt, published
in 1661, a book now numbered among the curiosities of literature
and still preserved in national libraries, but to which I have not
sought access. I therefore quote the following on the authority
of Dr. Ginther Beck, as given by him in his excellent mono-
graph of the genus Nepenthes, recently published in the Wiener
Illustrirte-Garten Zeitung :—Flacourt described and figured a
Nepenthes, which had been discovered by Comerson, the first
228 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. q
EKuropean traveller in Madagascar, under the name of ‘‘ Amrama-
tica.”” This Nepenthes was afterwards neglected or overlooked
Fie. 45.—NEpENTHES Lowi.
(From Transactions of Linnean Society.)
by botanists for 136 years, till it came to the knowledge of Poiret,
who published it in 1797 in Lamarck’s Encyclopedia as Nepenthes
madagascariensis. Itis worthy of remark that this, the first
species to become known, was one of the latest to be introduced
NEPENTHES. 929
into European gardens. This was brought about by Curtis, who
sent it to our Chelsea nursery while on a collecting mission for
us in Madagascar in 1878-79. It is really a handsome species,
for although the pitchers are only of medium size, they are of
very elegant shape and richly coloured. The other seventeenth-
century authors quoted by Dr. Gunther Beck are Bartholini
(1678), who mentions a miranda herba he had either seen or
heard of during his travels in the East; Grimm (1682), who
describes a planta mirabilis distillatoria, that is Nepenthes dis-
tillatoria, a native of Ceylon, and Plukenet (1696), who mentions
the same species under the name of wtricularia vegetabilis
Zeylanensivum.
In the eighteenth century the Nepenthes were brought within
the domain of science by Linnezus, at a very early period of his
distinguished career. The only species known to him was
distillatoria, of which he gives a minute and accurate description
in his “ Hortus Cliffortianus,’’ and to him, of course, we owe the
selection of the name Nepenthes for the designation of the genus.
The selection is a remarkable one; the word is of Greek origin,
and occurs in Homer’s Odyssey, Book IV., line 221, where it
means a freeing from or causing an oblivion of grief. The
passage has been thus translated :—‘‘ She (Helen) threw a drug
into the wine, from which they drank that which /frees men
from grief, and from anger, and causes an oblivion of all ills.”
Linnzus gives a perfectly satisfactory reason for the selection of
this singular word for a plant name. Alluding to the pitcher,
he writes :—“ If this is not Helen’s Nepenthes, it certainly will
be for all botanists. What botanist would not be filled with
admiration if, after a long journey, he should find this wonderful
plant. In his astonishment past ills would be forgotten when
beholding this admirable work of the Creator.’’ Curiously enough,
Mr. Burbidge, who at the time was on a mission for us in Borneo,
seems to have realised Linnzus’ sentiment on making the ascent
of Kina Balu, in company with Mr. P. C. M. Veitch in 1877,
when they first came upon the magnificent species which grow
on that mountain, for he tells us,* ‘‘ All thoughts of fatigue and
discomfort vanished as we gazed on these living wonders of the
Bornean Andes. To see these plants in all their health and vigour
was a sensation I shall never forget.”’
* “Gardens of the Sun,’ p. 100.
WIA >
Uj
Fic. 46.—Nerentues Norrutana (Masts).
NEPENTHES. 231
Ten years after the publication of the “‘ Hortus Cliffortianus,”’
Rumph’s “ Herbarium amboinense”’ appeared, in which the author
describes at great length a Nepenthes he had met with during
his voyage from Japan to Malacca. It is not quite certain
which species is intended, as the drawing accompanying the
description is poorly executed; but it is probably the small
pitchered gracilis. We next come to Loureiro, the Portuguese
naturalist, who visited Cochin China in 1790. In his “ Flora
cochinchinensis,”’ published three years later under the editorship
of Willdenow, at Berlin, one more species is brought to light,
Phyllamphora. Loureiro’s notion of the plant must have been
founded on an imperfect observation, for he concludes his
description with the statement that ‘‘ attached to the side of the
pitcher is a lid which of its own accord is opened or shut to
receive and absorb the dew.”’
I have given a sketch of the history of Nepenthes up to the
end of the eighteenth century. It is but a disjointed sketch, for
the earlier literature of the genus, although not extensive, is .
much scattered. Coming nearer our own times, the task is
somewhat easier, and the narrative more connected.
Among the earliest additions to the genus in the present
century, were Rafflesiana and ampullaria discovered by Dr.
William Jack at Singapore, when the British settlement there
was founded by Sir Stamford Raffles in 1819. Rafflesiana, as
we learn from the Botanical Magazine (sub t. 4,285), was
first introduced to the Royal Gardens at Kew by Captain Bethune
in 1845. Two years later Hookeriana was sent from Borneo to
the Clapton nursery by Mr. (now Sir Hugh) Low, and shortly
afterwards our collector; Thomas Lobb, sent a whole group of
species to our nursery at Exeter, which included Raffilesiana,
ampullaria, albo-marginata, Veitchu, Phyllanvphora, sanguinea
—this latter discovered by him on Mount Ophir—and an un-
named species that afterwards participated in the parentage of
the first hybrids raised. Although not the first Nepenthes culti-
vated in Great Britain, these species formed the nucleus of the
large collection subsequently brought together at Chelsea.
According to Aiton,* distillatoria had been introduced to
Kew from Ceylon in 1789, but was soon lost. Loddiges reintro-
duced it, and figured it in his Botanical Cabinet for 1826; the
* « Hortus Kewensis,” ed. II., 420 (1813).
232 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
plant had then been in his houses six or seven years. In the
same year Sims figured and described gracilis in the Botanical
Magazine* under the name of Phyllamphora, in the belief that
it was the same species as that described by Loureiro. This was
followed in 1828 by a figure and description by Professor
Graham, of Edinburgh, of Khasiana as distillatoria,t so that
three species had been introduced before the close of the third
decade, but soon lost, a circumstance not to be wondered at
seeing that the cultural requirements of these plants were then
but imperfectly understood, and the stoves of that age, heated by
brick flues and tan beds, were totally unsuited for them. In the
meantime the Dutch botanists, Blume and Korthals, stationed at
Buitenzorg,in Java, had brought to light several species previously
unknown, the latter of whom published in 1842 a list or mono-
graph of the species Known to him. And two more had been
discovered in the Philippines by Blanco, who gives a curious
account of them in his ‘‘ Flora Philippinensis,’’ which appeared in
1837.
By far the most remarkable discovery of new species was
made in 1851 by Sir Hugh Low, who, in the face of the most
discouraging difficulties, succeeded in making the ascent of
Mount Kina Balu, in Borneo, where he was rewarded for his
toil by finding four of the finest species known—namely, Rajah,
Edwardsiana, Loww, and villosa. He failed, however, to intro-
duce any of these species, but he brought home excellent dried
materials which enabled Sir Joseph Hooker to give a lucid
account of them in a paper read before the Linnean Society in
June 1859, and subsequently published in the Transactions of
the Society. With a view, if possible, of securing these remark-
able plants, Thomas Lobb, acting under instructions from the
late Mr. James Veitch, reached the foot of Kina Balu in 1856,
but was prevented from ascending the mountain by the hostility
and extortion of the natives. In 1858 Sir Hugh Low again
made the ascent in company with Mr. Spenser St. John, but
again failed to get plants home alive. Mr. St. John gives some
interesting particulars of these Nepenthes, dried pitchers of all
of which are before you, as seen in their native home, and also a
fresh pitcher of Rajah kindly sent to me by Mr. F. W. Moore, of
Glasnevin, to whom I gladly avail myself of this opportunity of
* Tab. 2,692. t Tab. 2,798.
| ly
eae
i he
ul
Z
= 4 A
Fic. 47.— NEPENTHES BURKEI EXCELLENS (Mast.).
2
934 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
tendering my best thanks. This pitcher is by far the finest ot
the species that has yet been produced under cultivation. I will
quote in part Mr. St. John’s descriptions :—“ All the species are
more or less abundant. ajah (Fig. 44, see p. 228) is a
dwarf plant rarely more than four feet high: its large pitchers
rest on the ground in a circle. One splendid specimen was found
to hold four pints, and in another was found a drowned rat; the
pitchers become a deep violet purple with age. Hdwardsiana is
a twining plant; the stem of one on being measured was found to
be 20 feet long, and one of its bright brick-red pitchers measured
214 inches in length. Lowi (Fig. 45) is easily distinguished
from all the rest by its strikingly curious shape, and by the absence
of a dilated ring round the aperture : it is bright pea-green outside
and mahogany redinside. Vzllosa occurs higher up the mountain
than any of the others: it has a downy peach skin with a good
deal of crimson on it, and a strongly lamellated flesh-coloured
ring.*
Another attempt to get these Nepenthes was carefully planned
and pluckily made in December, 1877, by Mr. F. W. Burbidge
and Mr. P. C. M. Veitch, and repeated eight months later by the
first-named naturalist, but with scarcely any better success than
attended Sir Hugh Low and Mr. St. John. Seeds of Rajah
were indeed sent home to my firm and some of them germinated,
but very few indeed of the seedlings have lived. It seems
that as the conditions of climate and environment under which
these species live are difficult to imitate, even approxi-
mately, the means for their successful culture have yet to be
arrived at.
A great impulse was given to the cultivation of Nepenthes
and other insectivorous plants by the Presidential address oi
Sir Joseph Hooker before the Biological Section of the British
Association for the Advancement of Science at Belfast in 1874.
Not long previously the same eminent botanist had compiled the
monograph of Nepenthes for De Candolle’s ‘‘ Prodromus,”’ still
the standard for reference, and which proved to be of especial
value at that time as a guide to searching for the unintroduced
species known to science. In 1872 there were ten species of
Nepenthes in cultivation, and four hybrids all raised in our
nursery which are enumerated and described by Dr. Masters in
* ‘«TJ,ife in the Forests of the Far East,” Vol. II,
;
|
.
ONE THIRD SIZE,
Fic. 48. —Neventuss x Sepentr (Khasiana x unnamed species).
i)
936 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the Gardeners’ Chronicle for that year.* During the ten years
that followed, seven more species were introduced by my firm,
and more hybrids were raised at Chelsea, of which further men-
tion will be made presently. The species included some of the —
finest in the genus; they were—Rajah and bicalcarata from |
Borneo, through Burbidge; hirsuta, from the same region through
another agency ; madagascariensis, through Curtis; Kenedyana,
from North Australia; and Viellardi, a native of New Caledonia,
through the Botanic Garden at Sydney ; and Northiana, through
Curtis, from North Borneo, the last-named under circumstances
of exceptional interest which I will relate. In the summer of —
1880, I was invited by the late Miss Marianne North to inspect
the collection of drawings she had made during her travels in the
Far East; amongst them I came across one of a Nepenthes which
I at once saw was a new species. On making inquiry respecting
its habitat, she could only inform me that while staying in north-
east Borneo, a native brought her a pitcher with which she was
so much struck that she at once made a drawing of it. It
happened at that time that we were about to send a collector to
Malaysia, and Curtis undertook the mission. Miss North very
kindly allowed him to see the drawing, and she also gave him
such information as she possessed respecting its habitat. Curtis
received special orders from us to try and introduce the plant into
Europe. He told me on his return that he had experienced
much difficulty in finding the plant, that he had searched for it
many days in vain, and had even decided on giving up the search,
in the belief that Miss North had been wrongly informed respect-
ing the locality in which it grows. Before leaving the place it
occurred to him to look over a steep escarpment in the hill-side,
which he accomplished by lying prostrate on the ground, and to
his great joy he discovered the plant growing at some distance
beneath him. He succeeded in reaching it, and happily found
some seed capsules, which he lost no time in transmitting to
Chelsea, where the seed soon germinated. Dr. Masters at our
request dedicated this fine species to the excellent lady who
helped us to introduce it; it has proved to be one of the most
tractable under cultivation as it is one of the handsomest of the
genus (I*ig. 46).
During a second mission to Malaysia in 1882-83, Curtis sent
* Pp. 540-542,
NEPENTHES. 937
home two more species previously unknown, one of which is named
after him, and the other, at first supposed to be a variety of
Curtisti, has since received specific rank from Dr. Masters under
the name of stenophylla.* In the following year the late David
Burke collected plants and seeds of two species in the Philippine
Islands, one of which, a very variable but decidedly beautiful one,
we are distributing under his name (Fig. 47). Whether these
species are the same as those detected by Blance fifty years earlier
is a question yet to be decided. Burke subsequently collected a
further supply of seed of Northiana, and amongst the seedlings
appeared a supposed hybrid between that species and albo-
marginata, and which has received the name of cincta.* And,
lastly, in 1890 we received from a correspondent in the Seychelles
seeds of Pervillex many of which germinated: this species has
since been introduced to Kew through Mr. Griffith, the Adminis-
trator of the islands. Iam glad tobe able to show a living plant
of this species, kindly lent by the Director of the Royal Gardens at
Kew. The number of introduced species including cincta and two
unnamed ones is thus brought up to twenty-four. Some of them
have since disappeared, to be followed doubtless by others from
causes that will best be understood when dealing with the
hybrids. To these we will now direct our attention. ;
The first hybrid Nepenthes was raised by Dominy, and bears
his name. “TEwas exhibited by us at the Royal Horticultural
Society’s Show at South Kensington in June 1862. Dominy also
raised a second hybrid named hybrida. He was followed by Seden,
who raised the hybrid that bears his name (Fig. 48), and a
second called Chelsonw (Fig. 49) from Hookeriana and Domini.
The work of hybridisation has been continued whenever
staminate and pistillate flowers have been simultaneously
available, whether of species or hybrids. Some of the results
obtained may be ranked in a horticultural sense amongst the
finest additions to the genus, notably Mastersiana (Fig. 50) and
Dicksoniana. The first-named was obtained in our nursery
by Court from Khasiana and sanguinea; the second is the
offspring of Rafflesiana, flowering in the Botanic Garden at
Edinburgh, fertilised with the pollen of Veitch, supplied from
our Chelsea nursery. The cross was effected by Mr. Lindsay
and the progeny is dedicated to the late Professor Dickson.
* Gard. Chron., s. 3 VIII. (1890), 240. Id. XXI. (1884), p. 540.
>
988 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Variability chiefly in the colour and slightly in the form of
the pitchers was observable amongst the progeny derived from a —
single cross in the earliest experiments made, a variability that
has been still more pronounced in the results of later crosses,
especially when one or both parents are themselves hybrids.
Owing to this cause and the imperfect record of some of the
earlier crosses, some of the statements made from time to time
respecting parentage cannot be vouched for. Although upwards
of forty hybrids are enumerated, it is certain they do not repre-
sent so many distinct crosses; in fact, a considerable number of
them are varietal forms that appeared amongst the progenies
obtained from crosses between the same pair of parents.
The following may be accepted as genuine hybrid types, that
is to say, the pitchers of these hybrids, the most reliable organ
for discrimination, bear evidence in shape, colour, size, &c.,
of their having been derived from the parentage assigned to
them :—
1. Dominw from Rafflesiana and an unnamed species from
Borneo (Fig. 51).
To this type must be referred intermedia and one or two
more that have since disappeared from cultivation.
2. Hybrida from Khasiana, then in cultivation as distilla-
toria, and an unnamed species from Borneo.
To this must be referred hybrida maculata, Courtw, and
rubro-maculata as varieties.
3. Sedenw from Khasiana and an unnamed species (Fig. 48).
4. Mastersiana from Khasiana and sanguinea (Fig. 50).
5. Cylindrica from hirsuta and Veitchii.
6. ftufescens from hirsuta and hybrida x var. Courtw; a
secondary hybrid.
7. Dicksomana from Rafflesiana and Veitchw (Fig. 52).
8. litter from an unnamed species and Cuwrtisw.
9. Mixta from Curtis and Northiana.
10. Tiveyi from Veitch and Curtisii superba (Fig. 58).
The progenies obtained from these ten crosses were raised
at our Chelsea nursery. |
11. Morganie from Sedenii or Phyllamphoraand Hookeriana,
a hybrid of American origin raised by Taplin (Fig. 54).
ul
K A ‘ \ \\
AN fH A \\ \
. 9 = “
240 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To this cross belongs Stewartit, Ratcliffiana, and Wrigleyana
distributed by ourselves ; also robusta, Ouwtramiana, Williamsii,
coccinea, Donnaniana, atrosanguinea, and others distributed by
Williams.
Besides these ten hybrids, we have at Chelsea the progenies
of other crosses that have not been named and are not yet
ready for distribution; they include one primary hybrid, of
which both parents are species ; two secondaries, of which one
parent is a species and the other a hybrid; and two tertiaries,
of which both parents are hybrids, an intermixture of forms
rapidly approaching that reached in the hybridisation of Orchids.
It may here be remarked of the majority if not of all of
these hybrids that having been raised under the artificial condi-
tions of a glass structure in this country, they have adapted
themselves to those conditions with far greater facility than
many of the species brought from the equatorial region. Of
course there are well-known exceptions in those species that
have long been denizens of our houses, as Rafflesiana, Hookeriana,
ampullaria, Khasiana, Phyllamphora, &. Although no hybrids
derived from present resources can ever supply the place of such
species as Rajah, Hdwardsiana (Fig. 55), villosa (Fig. 56), and
Lowii, the results of present and future hybridisation are doubt-
less destined to be the predominant factors of the Nepenthes in
a horticultural sense. Regret may be felt for the disappearance
from gardens of species that have been introduced, but the horti-
culturist whose object is to render available for general use
plants of the greatest interest or beauty that can be grown with
the greatest facility must necessarily devote his time and labour
to the cultivation of such.
It is now time to turn to the plants themselves and to note
such features in their life-history as should come within the cog-
nisance of all cultivators of them.
The embryo of the seed is not distinguishable even with the
aid of an ordinary pocket lens, but under the microscope it is
seen to be differentiated into an exceedingly minute axis and two
relatively large cotyledonary leaves. The seeds are usually
sown on the surface of a compost of peat fibre and chopped
sphagnum, in pots drained to three-fourths of their depth, and
placed in a closed frame in a glass house in a temperature of
21°-24° C. (70°-75° F.)._ Under these conditions the cotyledons
; Fie. 50.—Nerprntues x Masterstana (Khasiana x sanguinea).
242, TOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of fresh seeds appear in six to eight weeks, atcording to the
season of the year. The infant plant with the two seed leaves
and tiny rootlets is shown in Fig. 57, 1. Three to four or more
weeks elapse before any further change is detected, when the
first pair of true leaves, with a minute sessile pitcher at the —
apex of each, are developed as shown in Fig. 57, 2. A second
similar pair succeeds them, and after the lapse of three or four
months the plant has attained a form pretty much as represented
in Fig. 57, 3. Fig.57, 4, represents a plant about twelve months
old: it shows approximately the progress that has been made in
the interval in the case of plants from seeds ripened under the
same artificial conditions. In the case of imported seeds the
rate of growth is much slower.
The stems of vigorous growing Nepenthes will lengthen 3 to
4 feet in a single season and will have depending from them
twelve to eighteen pitchers. In practice, it is not usual to
allow the stems to ascend far unless the plant is especially ©
intended for flowering. After a few weeks’ growth, the stems
are, in the language of gardeners, “‘ stopped,” that is to say, the
point is pinched or cut off, which results in a branching at or
near the base; by this means pitchers of the most desired shape
and colour are obtained. In the wild state the stems of Nepen-
thes continue to lengthen year after year till, for want of
support, they fall by their own weight, resulting often in
fracture and a consequent change in the direction of axial
erowth. Instances are recorded of the stems of Nepenthes
attaining a length of 80 or more feet, being supported by the
trees against which they grow ; and where the prolonged midrib
of the leaf is brought into contact with a slender twig it will
coil round it, and in this way the plant obtains its support. It
would seem, from observations somewhat vaguely recorded, that
as the stems increase in length at their apical end so do they
die off at the opposite or basal end. Nepenthes are but poorly
provided with roots, probably on account of the temporary dura-
tion of their stems, which have the power of sending out new
roots into the thick covering of moss and lichen frequently
found on the trunks of trees growing in a highly humid tropical
climate. The Nepenthes are thence not wholly land plants, but
epiphytal under certain circumstances.
foliation.—There is great similarity in the foliage of all
CCG
SCS ax
ES
= —S i
SSS
= 2 » nat. size.
946 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
after the cotyledons, the cotyledons themselves showing no trace of
even a rudimentary pitcher (Fig.57, 2 and 3; p.253). In the stages
of growth immediately following, the pitchers assume a more
definite form, the operculum or lid and the ciliated ventral wings
are more clearly differentiated from the body of the pitcher.
These young pitchers are at first continuous with the blade and
form part of it, then sessile, and later separated from it by a
prolongation of the midrib; they are produced simultaneously
with the blade, not after it asin the adult plant. These infantine
pitchers are always found to contain a viscid fluid secreted by
numerous glands seated in the epiderm of the inner surface
which may be easily detected by the aid of a pocket lens; these
glands are fairly distributed over the whole inner surface of the
pitchers of young plants but in older plants on which the pitchers
have attained more or less their normal size, the glands are confined
to a certain area which varies considerably in extent in the
different species ; the secretions also are more copious, become
less viscid and have a peculiar flat and insipid flavour, implying
the presence of ingredients not found in the composition of
water. This watery fluid is preserved intact by the lid which
remains firmly closed till the pitcher has nearly attained its full
size.
As leaves continue to be produced, so a gradual change in
the size and shape of the pitchers becomesapparent. Instead of
the pitcher being produced simultaneously with the blade, it lags
behind as it were, the midrib is perceptibly prolonged beyond
the apex of the blade while the pitcher is still rudimentary, and
this continues till leaves are produced with full-sized pitchers.
If the stem is allowed to grow without check, the pitchers
appended to the leaves successively produced undergo a change
in shape and dimensions still more remarkable than what takes
place during the progress of development from the infantine to
what is regarded as the perfect form of the pitcher. To under-
stand clearly the extent of the change, it is necessary to note the
various parts of the pitcher ; for this purpose Lafflesiana affords
an excellent type. ‘The pitcher of this species in its best form is
of flask-like shape, it is most dilated at the bottom and gradually
contracts upwards ; it is furnished on the front or ventral side
with two broad coarsely ciliated or fringed wings; on the opposite
or dorsal side there is a keel marking the continuation of the
Fie. 53.—Nepentaes x Tivny1 (Gardeners’ Chronicle).
SS EE=—=EV—w— Zz?
= —— = = tp-4
= = Zz
————— = == —— BEE = Mw
SS Zz===—Z
ok
i: i '~
‘|
\d
q Al ~~
I)
Fic. 54.—NEpENTHES x MorGan1= (Sedenii or Phyllamphora x Hookeriana).
9A8 JOURNAL OF THE’ ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
prolonged midrib to the point of articulation with the lid. This
operculum or lid is a remarkable organ which, after being opened,
stands high above the aperture in a horizontal or ascending
direction, being raised by the triangular process on which it is
articulated. Around the aperture is the peristomium, a ring
which yaries much in the different species in breadth, colour,
and shape; the inner edge of this ring is armed with sharp teeth
which effectively prevent the escape of the entrapped insects.
The peristomium is a striking ornament of the pitcher in the
curiously shaped pitcher of Lowi the peristomium is absent, the
only known case. In all the species there is a sharp spine on
the dorsal side at the articulation of the lid and pitcher; in
bicalcarata, in addition to this there are two strong sharp spurs
on the opposite or inner side, whence the specific name. The
pitcher in its perfect form, as I have attempted to describe it,
takes an erect position with the ventral side opposite and often
pressed against the prolonged midrib of the blade. The change
in shape and size now about to be pointed out takes place much
in the same manner in every species and hybrid, so that when
this change has reached an advanced stage it is difficult to
identify from the pitcher itself to what species it belongs.
These changes in size and form are also accompanied by a
change in colour.
As leaf after leaf is produced from the ascending stem, the
pitchers first become longer and narrower; then follows a
eradual diminution of the parts while the pitchers are being
modified from the flask-like to the cylindric shape; the ventral
wings constantly diminish in breadth and the ciliate fringe dis-
appears until the place of the wings is denoted only by two
narrow keels, and instances have been observed in which even
these are obliterated. The pitchers not only undergo change in
size, form, and colour, but they also change their position in
respect to the prolonged midrib. By the time the seventh or
eighth pitcher has been produced above that which we have
already referred to as the perfect pitcher, the prolonged midrib
has made half a revolution on its own axis, so that the pitcher has
now its dorsal side towards it. As the pitchers diminish in size
with the ascent of the stem, so when a certain stage of growth
is reached, and as the plants arrive at the time of flowering, they
cease to be produced altogether, but the stem continues to grow
NEPENTHES. 249
{
ft
‘\
ri
tag's
ne yn” al
~—
Fig. 56.—NeEpENTHES viLLosa. (Hook. f.)
and produce leaves with prolonged midribs affording a support to
the plant and its inflorescence while maturing itsseed. Sir Hugh
Low observed of ampullaria which he sawin Sarawak, that the first
formed leaves have no blades but only pitchers with which the
ground is frequently covered as with a carpet. As the plant con-
I
250 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
tinues to srowthe lamina of the leaves begins to be developed andit
increases in size in successive leaves until the blade is perfect;
as the blade increases the pitcher decreases in size with every
new leaf and finally disappears altogether when the stem has
climbed into the trees.*
INFLORESCENCE.—F lower spikes are produced when the stem
has attained a considerable length, rarely otherwise. The
inflorescence is pseudo-terminal, that is to say, the flower stalk
is produced apparently from the end of the stem, but not really
so, for the stem continues to grow simultaneously with the flower
stalk but at a much slower rate, so that by the time the flowers
are expanded the base of the peduncle is seen to be inserted
opposite a leaf. The flower stalk sometimes attains a length of
two feet and bears upwards of a hundred flowers; it is always
racemed so far. as our experience goes, but in the wild state it is
said to be often branched (panicled). The flowers are diecious,
the pollen-bearing and the seed-bearing flowers being produced
on different plants ; the pedicels along the lower two-thirds of
the raceme bifurcate or divide into two branches each bearing a
single flower; those along the apical third are mostly simple,
fig. 58,11. The flowers are constructed on the tetramerous type,
which means that all the parts or organs of the flower are in
fours or in some simple multiple of four. Although this type of
structure is the only one yet seen in cultivated plants, it is not
absolute throughout the genus, an exception occurring in
Pervellei which has not yet flowered in our houses but which is
said to have but three perianth segments and ovaries with three
chambers in the place of four.
The staminate or male inflorescence here shown is that of
Curtisu (fig. 58,5). Each flower has a perianth of four green seg-
ments, shown somewhat sharply deflexed in fig. 58, 6, which was
drawn when the flowers were in an advanced state, but which are
spreading like those of the pistillate flowers when first expanded ;
the flower is rightly shown in fig. 58, 7,asseenfromabove. The
essential part of the flower is, of course, the andreecium, which
consists of eight stamens whose filaments are united into a column,
whilst the anthers form a compact head on the summit (fig. 58,
6 and 7). The seminiferous or female inflorescence (fig. 58, 8)
is that of mixta, a hybrid between Curtis 6 and Northiana?¢.
* “ Sarawak and its Productions,” p. 55.
NEPENTHES. 951
As in the pistillate flowers the perianth segments are four in
number but coloured reddish brown instead of green (fig. 58, 9
and 10); above them is the four-celled superior ovary, on the
upper end of which is seated the four-lobed stigma, the style of
the pistil being altogether absent (fresh racemes of flowers kindly
lent by Dr. Bailey Balfour, Mr. F. W. Moore, and Mr. George
Wythes, &c., here pointed out). The structure of the flowers of
Nepenthes is therefore extremely simple, and the manner in which
fertilisation is effected may be seen at a glance.
FertitisATIon.—In the wild state fertilisation is effected
by aerial agency; the structure Of the flowers favours this mode
in every way ; the staminate flowers are produced in much larger
numbers than the pistillate ones; the quantity of pollen even in
a single raceme is great, and in the aggregate where many
racemes or panicles of flowers are ready to discharge their pollen
it must, relatively speaking, be enormous, leaving a large margin
for the inevitable waste which occurs when wafted through the
air. On the other hand, the pistillate flowers have their stigmas
fully exposed ; no obstacle is therefore interposed to prevent the
minute pollen dust being caught by the viscid surface as it is
carried along by the wind.
With us pollination is effected by simply dusting the stigma
with pollen removed from the anther by a camel-hair pencil. In
the warm and moist temperature of the stove the pollen grains
begin to emit tubes in a very short time, and as they have no
style to traverse they soon reach the numerous ovules. Fig. 58, 12
shows a transverse section of an ovary, and fig. 58, 13, two
unfertilised ovules greatly enlarged. ‘The precise time taken by
the pollen tubes to reach the ovules has not been ascertained,
but that it is not long is evident by the external change observ-
able in the ovaries within a fortnight after pollination. The
capsules and seeds figured are those of Northiana (fig. 58, 14 and
15), the flowers which produced them were fertilised in the first
week of October of last year, and the capsules were matured early
in the following January, or in about three months after pollina-
tion and during the winter season. As we know that in the
summer months the capsules arrive at maturity in a somewhat
shorter period, it is safe to assume that such is the case also in
the wild state.
The number of seeds in each capsule ripened under cultiva-
H 2
952 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
tion may be set down as ranging from forty to sixty, but they
are probably more numerous in the wild state. They are minute
and light; those represented in fig. 16 were scarcely one-fifth
of an inch long, somewhat spindle-shaped but greatly attenuated
at each end. Their extreme lightness is highly favourable to
their dispersion by the wind. So light are Nepenthes seeds that,
- according to Dr. Giinther Beck, it takes 28,000 seeds of Phyllam- —
phora to weigh a gramme, or, the almost incredible number,
870,000, to balance the English ounce.
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION AND CLIMATOLOGY.
The geographical distribution of Nepenthes presents nothing
peculiar in itself; the region over which the species are spread
is, as a whole, fairly well defined, and its climatology is now well
understood. Of the thirty-six species, or thereabouts, known to
science fourteen are confined to Borneo, three more are common
to that and adjacent islands, thirteen more are extra-Bornean
but strictly Malaysian, the remaining six are much scattered—
there is one in North Australia, one in New Caledonia, one in
Ceylon, one in the Seychelles, one in Madagascar, and one in
North-East India. This enumeration shows that with the
exception of the last-named (Khasiana) all the species are
insular, and consequently all are found in relatively close
proximity to the ocean. Besides this, with three or four excep-
tions, they all occur within the equatorial zone: this zone
extends to about 12 deg. on either side of the equator. Most
of the species are quite local, but there are some, as Rafflesiana
and Phyllamphora, that have been detected in several places
and on different islands at a considerable distance apart, whilst
gracilis may be said to be almost ubiquitous throughout
Malaysia. Vveillardi, in New Caledonia, is the most eastern
species known, and Pervillec and Madagascariensis are the
most western; the two last-named and Khasiana may be
regarded as stragglers from the main body aggregated in Borneo
and adjacent islands. Whilst by far the greater number of
species occur near the sea-coast at a low elevation, the species
with large pitchers, discovered by Sir Hugh Low on Kina Balu,
occur only at elevations ranging from 5,000 to 8,000 ft. where
the thermometer falls during the night to 5°-6° C. (41°-48° F.)
NEPENTHE
954 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
and in the shade in the daytime, according to Mr. Spenser
St. John, it is frequently not more than 15°-16° C. (59°-62° F.).
The plants are enveloped in mist for several hours daily, much
in the same manner as the Odontoglossums on the higher slopes
of the South American Andes. Sangwinea occurs on Mount
Ophir at 2,000-2,500 ft., and Khasiana at 8,000 ft. elevation,
facts that should be noted by those concerned in the cultivation
of these plants.
The climate of the region, which for present convenience we
will call the Nepenthes region, is now well ascertained from
the long series of meteorological observations carried on at
Buitenzorg in Java, at Singapore, Penang, and other places.
From the record of these observations it is found that, except at
such high elevations as those mentioned, the climate is charac-
terised by the wonderful uniformity of its temperature day and
night as well as from one part of the year to another. Asa
general rule the greatest heat of the day does not exceed 82°-
38° C. (90°-92° F.), while it seldom falls during the night below
23° C. (74° F.). The extreme range of temperature at Batavia
in three years was found to be only 15° C. (27° F.), the maximum
being 35° C. (95° IF.) and the minimum 20° C. (68° F.). The
usual daily range of the thermometer is, on the average, only a
little more than 5° C. (about 10° F.).
During a large part of the year the air of the Nepenthes
region is nearly saturated with vapour, and owing to the great
weight of vapour its high temperature enables it to hold in
suspension, a very slight fall in the thermometer is accompanied
by the condensation of a large quantity of atmospheric vapour,
so that copious dews and heavy showers of rain are produced at
comparatively high temperatures and low altitudes. The yearly
rainfall ranges from 75 to 80 in. with local deviations. During
the wet months of the year it is rare to have many days in
succession without some hours of sunshine, whilst even in the
driest months there are occasional showers.
Such is the climate in which the Nepenthes live in their native
home, with the notable exceptions as regards temperature of
those species found at a high elevation. Nor does the climate
of the habitats of the outlying species differ essentially from that
of the equatorial zone, so that the general statement holds good
for them too.
NEPENTHES. 255
Fic. 58.
256 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
DISCUSSION.
Mr. F. W. BursipGe having been asked by the Chairman
to make a few remarks, said that he could not well express the
sense of pleasure and interest Mr. Veitch’s practical and splen-
didly illustrated paper had given to him as to others. His few
remarks would be confined to Nepenthes as insect traps, and he
should say a few words as to the native environment of the rare
Nepenthes of Kina Balou. He then observed that in Borneo the
natives called the pitchers or urns of Nepenthes “ priok-moniet,”’
or monkey’s cooking pots, and they were also well aware of their
insect-entrapping proclivities. The peptonised fluid of the half-
grown pitchers is also used by the Borneans as a sure specific in
cases of indigestion, its action being analogous to that of ripe
green figs, cheese, rennet, or the lacto-pepsine remedies not
unfrequently used with ourselves. When I was staying with the
headman of the Kadyans on the Lawas River, his people often
gave me delicious rice, cooked in the pitchers of N. Hookeriana,
as a sweetmeat to be eaten with jungle fruit and bananas.
The question naturally arose as to the practical use these pecu-
liar pitchers were to the plants that bore them. There could be
no doubt but that Nepenthes pitchers caught and decomposed
and digested, in part at least, their insect prey. But why should
Nepenthes and other insect-catching plants require an extra
supply of nitrogenous food obtained in this peculiar manner?
Why should Nepenthes do this when Palms, Arads, or Pelar-
goniums can obtain food from the water, air, and soil in the
usual way? As Mr. Veitch had stated, aud as every cultivator
knew, all insect-catching plants were characterised by their
sparse or weakly root system ; and these comparatively few and
weakly root fibres were not equal to the strain or demand for
food which arose when the plants had to produce flowers and
seed. Nature was a hard task-mistress, and sometimes, if not
often, she sent forth the fiat to her offspring, ‘‘ You must either
change your mode of life or you must die.’’ This decree had
long ago been issued to the Nepenthes, which had had to com-
pensate their weak root-action by the peculiar dual development
of their foliage leaves. In ordinary leaves absorption of CO,
and its decomposition under sunlight, by the aid of water and
earth salts taken up by the roots, was carried on; but Nepenthes
ee
ee ee ee
NEPENTHES. 957
had to do double duty with their leaves. The basal portion
carried out the function of ordinary leaves, while the swollen and
pitcher-like apical portion was specially modified for the entrap-
ping and decomposition and digestion of insect food. Thus we
see that the complete leaf of a Nepenthes has “ two strings to
its bow,’ and was enabled to exist under peculiar conditions of
specialised adaptation to peculiar circumstances and environ-
ment. Mr. Veitch had pointed out very clearly that Nepenthes
pitchers in a half-grown state, and before their lids opened, had
the power of secreting a limpid fluid, with a slightly acid taste,
and a weak odour of roasted apples, due to the malic acid the
fluid naturally contained. This fluid has been analysed and is
found to contain pepsine in appreciable quantities, so that it is a
true digestive fluid analogous to that of our own gastric juice,
and there are glands inside Nepenthes pitchers towards their
base which are also analogous to the secretive and absorptive
villi of the human stomach. In a word, the peptonised fluid
found in Nepenthes urns is specialised for digestive purposes
just as is rennet, or as are the peptonised elements found in fresh
ripe figs, both long known, and world-wide aids to digestion.
N. ampullacea is the only Nepenthes that has not honey glands
to attract insects. Mr. Burbidge next pointed out the way
insects were attracted to the urns of Nepenthes by a sugary or
honeyed secretion near the rims or mouths of the pitchers. This
honey, and perhaps also the odour of the peptonised fluid,
attracted many kinds of honey-eating insects, which became
caught inside the eel-trap-like ascidia. ‘Then decomposition and
digestion began, and a rich and nutritious sort of soup was the
result. Another thing now occurred, viz., the odour of the
decomposing fluid and dead flies became again an attraction for
carnivorous or flesh-eating insects, and so a second harvest of
victims was secured. Apart from honey-eating and flesh- or
carrion-eating flies, there are other insects caught, such as beetles,
cockroaches, wood lice, gnats, wasps, daddy long-legs ; and ants
innumerable are found in the urns of Nepenthes both in Borneo
and here in hot-houses at home. The formic acid of the ants
caught so universally no doubt plays a most important part in
intensifying or augmenting the action of the malic acid normally
present in the peptonised fluid or gastric juices secreted by these
plants as above shown. Of course the ferments set up by both
958 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
aerobic and putrefactive bacteria greatly assist in preparing the
insect soup ready for absorption and assimilation. It is peculiar
that though wasps are sometimes, even if rarely, caught by
Nepenthes, I have never seen nor heard of a pitcher ever contain-
ing either hive or humble bees amongst its captures. He begged
to refer those who wished for fuller details to Dr. Vine’s paper on
“ The Physiology of Pitcher Plants,” in Journal of the Royal
Horticultural Society, Vol. XXI., Part I., p. 92.
In referring to the native climatic conditions under which
Nepenthes Rajah, N. Edwardsiana, N. Lowii, N. Villosa, and N.
Harryana* are found, Mr. Burbidge was peculiarly at home,
he having twice ascended the Great Granite Mountain of Kina
Balou in N.-W. Borneo, on which alone.they exist. On the
north, or Marie Parie, spur of this mountain, N. Rajah and N.
Edwardsiana are found at 4,000 feet elevation, but on the great
southern spur, in a clearer and more open situation, the species
occur in the following order :—N. Lowi, epiphytal on trees at
5,000 to 7,000 ft.; N. Edwardsiana, 7,000 to 8,000 ft., epiphytal on
low mossy trees; N. Rajah, 8,000 to 9,000 ft., terrestrial in
yellow loam and decomposed granite, with its great basal
pitchers resting, and often buried, in dead leaves, moss, and other
detritus or debris. N. Villosa (terrestrial) and N. Harryana
(epiphytal, wild hybrid) are both found together with N.
Edwardsiana at about 8,000 ft. elevation; and N. Villosa extends
up to 10,000 or 11,000 ft., being in some places found along with
the most elevated plants of N. Rajah.
The two last-named species are terrestrial, while N. Lowii,
N. Edwardsiana, and N. Harryana are more often found in an
epiphytal state, their long stems wreathed about the branches of
low trees, rooting here and there in the wet moss that clothes
them. N. Rajah bears the largest and most capacious urns, half-
buried in dead leaves and moss, their lower ends resting on the
wet ground. N. Edwardsiana has pitchers 10 in. to 23 in. in
length, elegantly cylindrical, and of a clear light brick-red colour,
with green base and a pink frilling of vertical rounded plates
* Named in compliment to Mr. Harry J. Veitch, who has ever taken the
greatest interest in the importation and culture of Nepenthes of all kinds.
N. Harryana is a natural hybrid between N. Edwardsiana x N.
Villosa, discovered by Mr. Burbidge in 1878, and so named by Sir Joseph
Hooker, of Kew. It is the only wild hybrid known, and is exactly inter-
mediate between its parents.
a!
NEPENTHES. 259
around its orifice. N. Lowii, with thick, leathery, green, flagon-
shaped pitchers, and an enormous lid over its widened mouth, is
the most distinct and peculiar of all. The rimof its crater-shaped
mouth is nearly smooth and of a glossy brown colour inside ;
while the peptic or digestive glands in the lower portion of its
urns are the largest and most remarkable of any as yet discovered.
The narrowed waist or constricted part of this unique pitcher
and its leathery opaque substance render the lower swollen half
of the urn perfectly dark—a sort of “black hole of Calcutta”
to its insect prisoners. All the pitchers of all the Nepenthes
literally swarm with millions of the putrefactive forms of
bacteria, but the extra darkened character of the urns of N. Lowii
suits them and their work much better than do those of most
other kinds, which admit a certain amount of light from the
orifice, and have pitcher coats of a more or less translucent
character. As will be seen, the bacteria, wretched but useful little
imps of darkness as they are, have a fine time, revelling as they
do in the rich, soupy contents of flies, beetles, and ants innumer-
able. N. Veitchii (= N. lanata) is remarkable amongst all the
pitcher plants as being usually epiphytal on dead trunks or
branches of trees. Its leaves are two-ranked on the stem, and
some of them clasp around the tree so as to hold the plant firmly
in its position, which the weak roots alone would not do. This
plant growing on dead wood resembles its habitat, in being of a
dull brownish colour, and its pitchers mainly catch such beetles
and boring insects as exist in decayed timber, such as beetles,
and ants innumerable. Its pitchers, and also those of N.
bicalcarata, are constantly robbed of their prey by insect-eating
birds, and also by the quaint little Tarsier, which I saw now and
then carefully examining their urns. .
N. bicalcarata* is also visited by a species of ant which is far
too clever to be caught in the urns. This ant’s object is water,
and to obtain this it bores a hole through one of the large sugar-
secreting glands of the stalk behind the pitcher, just below the
water-line, seeming to know by instinct—or is it experience ?—
that the water of the pitchers so operated upon will well up to
the hole as it does in a syphon pipe. The sluggard is told to go
to the ant for wisdom, but we find this clever ant going to the
* Introduced alive by Mr. Burbidge for Messrs. Veitch. It had pre-
viously been found by Mr. (now Sir) Hugh Low on the Lawas river.
260 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
pitchers for water, without trusting itself to the digestive ferments
inside, where of course it would speedily perish.
In speaking of the peculiar climatic conditions existent on
Kina Balou, where these noblest and rarest of all the species are
only to be seen, Mr. Burbidge alluded to the great mist zone.
«This enormous mountain range is about sixty miles from the
sea-coast, and the intervening country consists of low ranges of
coast hills and rich alluvial plains and marshes. The topmost
peak above the great southern spur is 138,700 feet high. It
naturally follows that this mountain affords an enormous range
of climate and temperature. The thermometer descends to
freezing point at the top, and there is sleet, but no snow has
been seen. The day temperature of the sea-coast and plains is
generally from eighty to ninety degrees in the shade, and
perhaps ten degrees lower only on the coldest nights. The great |
\ ? -
~ A) ‘ ‘
Sere Ret ‘COLD DESCENDING
ALT... J3.70D, FEET Biws 2g CURRENTS OF AIR
ALT... 19.000
ALWAYS NER
CLOUDS -FNAJSAN
ae ORL N .EpwarDSIANA
om RAIN
Se oes LO eee
13.700 FT.
SEA LEVEL
Fie. 59.
Diagram showing hot and cold air currents on the sides of the Kina
Balou mountain in Borneo, meeting and condensing at the Nepenthes zone.
granite peaks of this mountain, even at the distance stated, are
cold enough and massive enough to attract a current of hot,
moisture-laden air from the sea, and this current sets in every
day about four or five o’clock. The diagram here given will
illustrate what occurs better than words.
“ Kvery night in the year there is a deluge of rain in what I
have called the Nepenthes zone of this mountain, that is, from
5,000 to 10,000 feet in altitude, and even if not raining in the
|
|
|
‘NEPENTHES. 261
y-time there is in this zone a constant state of what has been
HOT HOT
ELEVATION
PLAN
Fic. 60.
Suggested sketch plan for a special Nepenthes house. Hot saturated air
_ to be admitted to cold house, so as to ensure nearly constant dew-point or
saturation, and condensation of moisture.
ealled ‘Scotch mist,’ or air-clouds condensing into small rain,
_ which wets one to the skin most thoroughly in half an hour.
262 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
All the time I was up this mountain (I was there on two occasions
in what below were the wet and dry seasons), I never had a dry
thread to my back, except at night in the cave with a great bonfire
blazing outside. The native guides from the last village on the
road, Kiau (altitude 3,000 feet), found the wet and cold (forty-
nine to fifty-five degrees Fahr.) on this mountain too much for
them, and they became quite paralysed, and finally left for their
homes rather than endure the chilly dampness of this Pitcher
Plant paradise. At 9,000 to 10,000 feet altitude the trees are
lew and scrubby, and covered with long moss, filmy ferns (here
I saw the trees draped with the rare T’richomanes plwma, only
seen alive previously by the veteran plant hunter, Tom Lobb),
and Lichens or Usnea; and creeping, monkey fashion, amongst
this vegetation was only another name for a perpetual shower-
bath from the branches overhead.”
Growing in this comparatively cool temperature, where dew-
point or saturation is almost constant, these noble Nepenthes not
only prove to be exceedingly difficult of transplantation and
introduction to Europe, but even when, as in the case of N.
Rajah, they are introduced by seeds, they are extremely difficult
of cultivation. Plants brought down to the hot plains soon die
off, and even if shipped safely in Wardian cases, they cannot
withstand the heat of the sea voyage.
In order to grow them successfully, Mr. Burbidge suggested a
cold greenhouse surrounded by hot plant-stoves, so arranged
that the warm moisture-laden air of the stoves could be
admitted to the cold house so as to not only warm it sufficiently,
but more especially to ensure a constant state of saturation and
condensation of moisture on the stems and foliage of these
Nepenthes, together with a state of comparative coolness such as
naturally exists where they grow.
In suggesting such a special structure for these noble
mountain Pitcher Plants, I need scarcely say that it would also
be equally useful in ensuring the health and prosperity of many
orchids, ferns, and other plants which are naturally found
growing wild on the wet and misty mountains of the tropics
both east and west, but which defy cultivation in ordinary hot-
houses.
PERSIAN CYCLAMEN. ~ 968
PERSIAN CYCLAMEN.
By Mr. W. Iecunpen.
[Read September 21, 1897.]
No apology will be offered for bringing forward this important
- subject to-day. It is not too early nor too late, though it would
have been more satisfactory to have been able to point to a few
well-flowered plants, such as might have been brought here in
November or later. Not one among my hearers can, if they are
honest, gainsay the fact that Persian Cyclamen rank among
the most beautiful, the most serviceable, and the most popular
of winter-flowering plants. Itis doubtful if they have a rival,
and they ought to be considered invaluable alike to private
gardeners as well as to trade or market growers. No other plant
that Iam acquainted with—at any rate, that may be raised so
cheaply—can claim to be so profitable. Well-grown Cyclamen
are capable of producing flowers freely from October to March
inclusive, and there is much to admire in the foliage of the
best strains, as well as in the flowers andin their scent. But there
is a flaw in the character of this gem of the winter. All appre-
ciate their merits, but how many among us can truthfully say
they invariably succeed in growing Cyclamen satisfactorily ?
Only a limited number—or I know nothing about it. The least
that can be said is that there are far more failures than successes.
What gardener of an observant turn of mind has not seen batch
after batch of miserably stunted plants, with a few leaves and
still fewer flowers, that represent the sum total of the various
_ growers’ skill in the cultivation of Cyclamen? As a successful
as well as an unsuccessful grower, being also one who goes about
with his eyes open, and ever bent on improving the shining hour,
I venture to offer a few hints as to how failures may be more
often avoided in the future.
Persian Cyclamen cannot be grown to anything approaching
perfection in the same haphazard fashion that answers fairly
well in the case of Cinerarias and Chinese Primulas. From
first to last they must have every attention, and ought really to
be made quite as much a speciality as are Chrysanthemums with
so many growers. Private gardeners, with their multifarious
duties and manifold worries, are at a serious disadvantage,
especially when we compare their conveniences with those at
264 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the disposal of our most successful trade growers. All the same,
some of them grow Cyclamen remarkably well, and so might
many more if only they went the right way to work. My advice
to gardeners generally is either to do them well, or else not to
attempt their cultivation at all. |
SowING THE SEED.—When the rage for Cyclamen first set
in—this following quickly upon the commencement of the
wonderful improvement effected by florists in the strains—
most of us erred in sowing the seed too late and too thickly.
February and March is too late to sow seed, though I have
succeeded well with plants resulting from sowing seed early in
January. Rather than have the seedlings starving in pans, or,
worse still, in small pots in positions not good for them (notably
dry shelves in a forcing house, owing to want of a better place), I
would prefer raising themin January. Of late years I have sown
the seed at least two months earlier, or in October, while noted
trade growers not infrequently sow some of their seed as early as
August or September, and the rest nearer mid-winter. In each
and every case new seed is to be preferred to old, as it germinates
more quickly and strongly. From first to last no check ought
to be given to the growth of the young plants. If once the roots
are badly broken or injured in any way, or if the tiny corms
harden prematurely, subsequent progress will inevitably prove
most unsatisfactory. Instead, therefore, of raising the plants
mustard-and-cress fashion as of old, the more modern plan of
sowing thinly, thereby obviating the necessity for pricking out,
is much the best.
Fill well-drained pans with a mixture of equal parts of fresh
loam and good natural leaf soil, with silver sand added. Make
this firm and level, press the seed singly into it about 14 in.
apart each way, and cover with a quarter of an inch or so of fine
soil. Arrange these pans on a slate-covered staging in a house
where the temperature will range from 60° to 70°, give a gentle
watering, cover with squarés of glass, and darken this with
brown paper or moss. Good seed will germinate, if the soil is
kept uniformly moist, in five or six weeks. When this has taken
place, remove the shading, and gradually inure the seedlings to
the air and light, eventually raising them up near to the glass.
Keep them growing in the same temperature they were raised in,
but carefully screened from either cold currents of air or extra
PERSIAN CYCLAMEN, 265
oS dry heat, till sturdy little plants are formed, when rather less
heat is desirable. Spray them with tepid water at least once a
day, and keep the soil in the pans uniformly moist, but not
saturated.
PotTING AND OTHER CuxLTURAL Desratus.— Before the
roots become interlaced with each other the young seedlings
ought to be placed singly into 2}-in. pots. Seeing that
they are well apart in the seed pan, every plant can be
lifted out with the point of a label, with a small portion of
soil about the roots, and if properly potted no serious check
to the plant’s progress will be given. For this first potting,
soil similar to that in which the seeds were sown may be used.
This should not be pressed hard, and the tiny corms ought to
show just above the level of the soil. Itis now when the private
gardener’s difficulties become apparent, especially when the first
potting takes place in the autumn rather than in March, as
would be the case if the seed were sown in December or
January. Young Cyclamen, as before hinted, will not thrive in
dry surroundings, and soon become stunted and dirty on dry, hot
shelves. Where they succeed best is on an ash-covered staging
in low span-roofed houses such as trade growers favour; but
failing these, plunge the pots closely together in large shallow
boxes filled with either fresh moss or cocoa-nut fibre refuse, and
block these well up to the light. The soil must be kept on the
moist side, taking care not to sour it by over-watering, and on
clear days lightly spray the plants overhead in the mornings and
afternoons, also shading them from strong sunshine. The
temperature may range from 55° to 65°, and the atmosphere of
the house should be kept moist.
It is at this stage of their career that many plants are crippled
by an attack of a small species of aphis, this happening most
often in mixed plant houses. In former years we have been
obliged to dip the infested plants in soapy tobacco-water, syringing
this off the leaves next day, but nicotine fumes are the present-
day remedy.
If necessary to save the foliage from becoming drawn, re-
plunge or rearrange the plants, giving them rather more room
than previously. Before they become badly root-bound or
weakened by being kept too long in small pots, all worth the
trouble should have a shift, this time into 5-in. pots. A rather
I
266 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
richer compost is now desirable. To two parts of sweet,
sound loam, add one part each of good leaf soil and powdered —
dry cow manure with sand, and, if the loam is devoid of fibre,
“burn bake’’ added. Pot moderately firmly, taking care not to
damage the leaves nor to unduly bury the corms. Return them
to either an ash-covered staging, standing them close together at —
first, or, if shelves only are available, stand the pots on green moss,
and keep this moist. In the case of late-raised plants it will be
advisable to transfer them direct from the potting bench to
shallow frames on a mild or nearly exhausted hot-bed, placing
abundance of ashes or else boards under them to keep worms out
of the pots. In either case gentle heat, plenty of light, but no
strong sunshine on the plants, a moist atmosphere, and the usual
round of spraying are details that must be observed.
During the hottest part of the summer all the plants ought
to be thinly arranged in shallow pits or frames sloping away
from the south. With me they thrive well in a shallow pit
against the west wall of a long span-roofed vinery. Wherever
located, the plants must be religiously shaded from strong
sunshine, ought not to be exposed to drying winds, and should
be sprayed twice on clear days. Be careful not to leave
the shading on when it can very well be dispensed with, and
avoid crowding the plants, as they are much more ornamental
when the leaf-stalks are not unduly lengthened out. In August,
not later, some of the strongest plants may be shifted into 7-in.
pots, and if everything has gone on satisfactorily, this size will
be found none too large. Any flowers that show colour on the
plants much before October should be drawn away.
TREATMENT DURING THE FLOWERING PERIoD.—As a rule
late in September is soon enough to house Cyclamen; and this
brings us to another difficulty which trade growers do not share
with private gardeners. The majority of the latter have no light
span-roofed houses with a central pathway and convenient side-
stages for their plants during the winter. But this is what is
wanted especially if large batches are grown. But because they
cannot have just what they want is no reason why gardeners
should muddle their Cyclamen among a variety of other green-
house plants. They must be kept clear of everything else. Let
them share a side-stage in a warm greenhouse with cinerarias and
primulas, if need be, at the coolest end. All of these plants are
—
PERSIAN CYCLAMEN. Y67
better kept together in groups. If the stagings are low or the sides
of the house high, raise the Cyclamen on inverted pots, keeping
every plant clear of its neighbour. In any case keep a close look-
out for greenfly, and subject these to nicotine fumes on the slightest
signs of an attack. I have seen hundreds of good plants spoilt,
ruined in fact, owing to a fortnight’s too long delay in dipping
or fumigating them.
Water the plants carefully and always round the sides of the
pots, not right in the centre of the corms. Plants with their
pots well filled with roots will be benefited by occasional supplies
of clear soot-water or other weak liquid manure, taking care to
keep it off the foliage. All flowers and any leaves to go with
them should be drawn clean away from the corms, never cut.
When stumps are left, they rot down to the corms, and decay
quickly spreads all round. Remove all old flower-stalks in the
same way, early seed-saving weakening the plants and being other-
wise undesirable. No forcing ought to be attempted, the plants
flowering grandly in a temperature of 45° by night to 50° or 55°
by day, accompanied by a gentle circulation of warm dry air.
THE Srconp SEAsoN.—Hitherto my remarks have been
strictly orthodox, but when we come to discuss the treatment of
Cyclamen that are to flower a second time, then it will be found
I am not on the side of our authorities. For several summers I
tried the plan of only partially resting the crowns, and planting
them with many of their old leaves intact in frames on mild or
nearly exhausted hot-beds. Some were also planted in well-
prepared soil in both sunny and shady places, with the result in
each case of only a limited number of plants succeeding suffi-
ciently well to pay for carefully lifting and re-potting. These
experiments, then, were not satisfactory. It was subsequently
proved to my satisfaction that completely drying off the plants,
re-starting and re-potting, was the best practice, and since adopting
it a failure has never taken place. As a matter of fact, my two-
year-old plants are frequently of more value to me than well-
grown younger ones, and at the present time I could point to
numbers of them in perfect leafage and a foot through. Old
Cyclamen should never be turned out of doors, but after flower-
ing ought to have water gradually withheld from them prior to
literally baking them in the full sunshine. It is the half-hearted
drying-off that is most likely to end badly. Lay them on their
12
268 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
sides if they cannot be kept dry in any other way ; andI might add
that the best hit I ever made was when a row of plants were laid on
their sides on a shelf in a melon-house. They had a thorough
Fic. 61.—Tur CychaMENn As IntRODUCED. (Jowrnal of Horticulture.)
roasting. When they are thus thoroughly ripened, a cool frame
suits them for a time. In June or early in July clean off all
dead leaves and dried leaf-stalks, set the pots up closely together
and water repeatedly, or till enough has been given to thoroughly
moisten the soil. Then, if the frame or pit is kept close and the
PERSIAN CYCLAMEN. 269
corms be syringed morning and evening, they will break into
; growth over the greater part of their surface. Before this
7 growth is far advanced, all the plants should be overhauled.
, Turn them out of their pots, pick away as much of the old soil
Fic. 62.—Tuer Cycramen or To-pay. (Journal of Horticulture.)
as possible without breaking the old and already active roots,
and return to pots a size or so larger than they were in pre-
viously. If returned to the frames or shallow pits arranged
thinly on a bed of ashes, watered, sprayed, and shaded as advised
270 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
in the case of the young plants, progress will be rapid and highly
satisfactory. Instead of old plants being later in flowering than
the younger ones, they are, if treated as I have advised, more
likely to be earlier, plenty of them with me having their buds
very prominent at the present time. These old plants should
have more liquid manure than the youngsters, and of course
require more room in their flowering quarters. Seed-saving has
a weakening effect upon the young corms, and also interferes
with their preparation for flowering again.
Allusion has already been made to the injurious effects
aphides have upon Cyclamen, and the remedy for them answers
equally well for thrips. Hel-worms sometimes attack the roots
of Cyclamen, causing them to swell abnormally, and having the
effect of completely paralysing their action. For this reason the
pans containing the seed, and the young plants later on, ought
never to be placed in near proximity to cucumbers, tomatos, or
other plants, the roots of which are very liable to be infested by
this nematode. The remedy is Little’s Soluble Phenyl diluted
freely, a wineglassful, or 2 0z. as measured by an 8-oz. medicine
bottle, proving sufficient for three gallons of water. This applied
occasionally instead of clear water, proves destructive to the eel-
worm, and stimulates rather than retards the growth of the plants.
VARIETIES OF CYCLAMEN Persitcum.—This paper would not
be complete without a brief allusion to the good work florists
have done in the direction of improving the strains of Cyclamen.
Most of us remember how poor comparatively the flowers of the
strains first distributed were (Fig. 61), and last season my memory
was refreshed by a sight in Messrs. Sutton & Sons’ Reading
Nurseries of a batch of C. persicum, which had been imported
by that famous firm direct from Persia. Doubtless these suffered
by contrast with the grand varieties flowering alongside of them,
for though well-grown and full of flower they appeared quite insig-
nificant. By stages our strains have gradually arrived at perfection
surely (Fig. 62). It appears, however, that we are soon to have
feathered or plumed varieties, and some of our enthusiasts will not
be happy till we have monstrosities in the shape of doubled flowers.
Not only are the modern flowers very much larger than the
type and the colours beautifully varied, but the plants are also
much stronger in constitution than of old, and the foliage so
handsome that the present-day Cyclamen might well be culti-
yated for the beauty of their leaves alone,
© ae A ee Rh ep
CAMPANULA BALCHINIANA., er.
CAMPANULA BALCHINIANA x.
Tuts plant was one of the curiosities of the last Temple Show,
and many people who saw it there, without having the oppor-
tunity of a close examination, could scarcely credit that it was a
true Campanula, but such it is.
The following description appeared at the time in the
Gardeners’ Chronicle :—
“The stems are slender, prostrate, and, like the leaves,
densely hirsute, with longish, straight, white hairs. The leaf-
stalks are about 4 cent. (say 14 inch) long, sulcate, expanding
into a roundish, coarsely-toothed limb, the dise of which is
green, the edges creamy white. When quite young, the leaves
are of pale violet colour. The flowers are solitary, on long,
slender stalks. The ovary, which in Campanulas is inferior,
beneath the flower, and very conspicuous, with the sepals and
petals spreading from its upper edge, is in these specimens wholly
superior and enclosed within the flower. The sepals are re-
presented by five, shortly-stalked, green leaves; the corolla is
regular, like that of C. isophylla, with a short, open tube,
expanding into five flat petals. There are five stamens, with
imperfect anthers and a style.
* Learning that this plant had been raised by an eminent
botanist, Mr. William Mitten, we appealed to him for further
information, which he has been kind enough to give us, as
follows :—
“«The variegated Campanula grown by Messrs. Balchin &
Son was raised by me from seed taken from C. fragilis and C.
isophylla alba; these, standing in pots, I had endeavoured to
intercross, and capsules taken from both supplied the seeds, which
were sown together. Excepting the two plants with variegated
foliage, which are a little more robust in growth, there was no
appearance that C. isophylla had any influence on the progeny.
There was much variation in the pilosity of the seedlings, but all
were blue-flowered, and none different from the ordinary state of
C. fragilis. I might have applied pollen of C. turbinata as well,
but there was no trace of that species in the seedlings. No self-
sown seedlings have ever occurred to me of C. isophylla, which
I have only in the white-flowered form; but young plants of C.
fragilis come up everywhere. I left Messrs. Balchin to put any
name to the plant they chose. Not much was anticipated from
272 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
this random intercrossing, but I mayjust mention that in taking
up the pollen from a matured anther I have found that when a
bit of black sealing-wax is drawn out to a blunt point and (when
required to pick up pollen) just rubbed over the sleeve, the wax
Fic. 63.—CAMPANULA BALCHINIANA x (Mitten).
Natural size, showing free, leafy, stalked sepals and superior corolla and
ovary. In the diagrammatic section, S=sepal, P=petal. Two hypeayaies
stamens and a superior ovary in section are seen.
becomes sufficiently electrified that loose pollen is caught up, can
be seen, and applied where desired, almost without touching a
flower.’ ”’
Since the publication of the above note a further opportunity
of examining the flowers has occurred. In Messrs. Veitch’s
Nursery, at Chelsea, in September last, the flowers were as
conventionally proper as any Campanula flowers could be. The
eccentric behaviour of the plant figured (which was forwarded
through the kindness of Mr. R. Dean) must therefore be con-
sidered as exceptional, though in the writer’s ‘“ Vegetable —
Teratology,” at p. 80, other cases are cited as “ occasionally met
CAMPANULA BALCHINIANA. 278
with.’’ Be that as it may, the eccentricity is very interesting
to the botanist, as it suggests the possibility that what is now
exceptional and eccentric was in prehistoric times the normal
state of things; in other words, that the hybrid Campanula, as
here figured, affords an illustration of what naturalists call
“reyersion.”” Writing, not from definite knowledge of what
goes on in the course of the progressive development of a
Campanula flower from its initial to its complete condition, but
from the analogy presented in countless other plants, it may be
inferred that all Campanulas in the course of their existence
present for a time an initial arrangement of parts like that
shown in the figure. This relative simplicity of construction
and arrangement is, however, soon lost. Growth here, growth
there occurs, but in unequal measure, and results in the greatly
modified flower usually seen. But if the growth here and the
growth there be equal, or in regular proportion, then a corre-
spondingly regular flower is produced. There can be no question
about the facts—the progression from the simple to the complex
in the normal flower, the arrest or suppression of that progress
in the malformed bloom—but we are almost entirely in the
dark as to the reason why the floral development was checked,
and made to assume a simpler character. We may say it was
brought about by a change in the process of nutrition occurring
at a particular stage of the plant’s growth. But that is only a
conjectural assertion. It may be true or it may not be. The
cultivator may be inclined at first to consider any such specula-
tions as outside of his province and vein. But a moment’s
consideration will show him that if we did but know the causes
producing such changes we should, in all probability, have the
power of inducing them ourselves, and of doing systematically,
and with more or less certainty, what now, if done at all, is
effected in a fortuitous, haphazard manner.
In the present instance hybridisation may fairly be assumed
to have upset the balance of “ nutrition’’ and “ construction.”
But if so, why in one plant and not in theothers? It is as well
to say, Wedon’t know!” Nevertheless, we trust some hybridist
will, with greater precautions to ensure certainty of result, trans-
fer the pollen of C. fragilis on to the stigma of C. isophylla,
and vice versd, and having noted his results will communicate
them to the R.H.S. Scientific Committee.
jad bee
274 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
REPORT ON POTATOS AT CHISWICK, 1897.
Sixty-three varieties of Potatos were grown for trial, mostly
new ones, but including a few of the best varieties of recent intro-
duction for comparison. The ground had been occupied with
fruit trees for many years, and the deep working necessary to get
out the roots of the trees made the soil admirably suited for the
crop, which was a general success. The collection was examined
by the Fruit and Vegetable Committee on two occasions, on
August 5 and on September 8, the former date being for the
early and the latter for the late varieties. The cooking qualities
of a few promising varieties were also tested on November 5.
F.C.C.=First Class Certificate.
A.M.=Award of Merit. |
x x x =Highly Commended.
x x =Commended.
1. Beauty of Hebron (Sutton).—The soil at Chiswick does
not suit this variety, it being weak in growth and the crop
light.
2. Blue Beard (Hurst).—Round, blue, rough skin, eyes
rather deeply set ; medium size ; moderate crop, slightly diseased ;
tall haulm. Late.
3. Bovee (Henderson, New York).— Kidney, pale pink, rough
skin, eyes full; large; moderate crop, free from disease; tall
haulm. Late.
4. Brenchin Castle (Andrew).—Round, white, eyes full;
medium size; heavy crop, free from disease; tall haulm. Late.
5. Brumfield’s No. 1 (Brumfield).—Kidney, white, eyes full ;
large and good shape; very heavy crop, slightly diseased ;
moderate haulm. Late.
6. Brumfield’s No. 2 (Brumfield).—Kidney, white, eyes full ;
the crop was great, but the tubers too small to be useful; slightly
diseased. Late.
7. Cardinal, x x x September 8, 1897 (Lidstone).—Round,
red, rough skin, eyes shallow; large; very heavy crop, free
from disease; moderate haulm. Late.
8. Diamond Jubilee No. 4 (Dibbens).—Round, white ;
extraordinary crop, tubers too small for use; diseased. Late.
REPORT ON POTATOS AT CHISWICK, 1897. 275
9. Diamond Jubilee, x x November 5, 1897 (Vert).—
Kidney, white, eyes full; medium size; heavy crop; moderate
haulm. Late.
‘10. Diamond Jubilee (Andrew).—Round, white, eyes full,
rough skin ; medium size ; good crop, free from disease ; moderate
haulm. Late.
11. Dr. Kitchen (Dibbens).—Roundish oval, white, eyes full ;
large and handsome; moderate crop, free from disease ; tall
haulm. Late.
12. Early Bird (Turner).—Kidney, white, eyes full; large ;
very heavy crop, free from disease; short haulm. Early.
13. Early Crimson Flourball (Daniel).—Round, red, eyes
deep ; large ; rather a poor crop, free from disease; tall haulm.
Midseason.
14. Early Eclipse (Fidler).—Kidney, white, eyes full; large ;
heavy crop, much diseased; short haulm. Early.
15. Early Favourite (Palmer).—Kidney, white, eyes full;
very heavy crop, diseased; short haulm. Early.
16. Early Monarch (Harrison).—Kidney, white, eyes full ;
medium size; heavy crop, free from disease; moderate haulm.
Karly.
17. Early Short-top (Harrison).—Kidney, white, eyes
shallow ; very large; good crop, free from disease; short haulm.
Karly.
18. Eleombe’s Britannia (Nutting).—Kidney, white, eyes
full ; good crop, slightly diseased; short haulm. LEarly.
19. Epicure (Sutton).— Round, white, eyes deeply set; large ;
moderate crop, free from disease; short haulm. Second early
or midseason.
20. Fyvie Flower, F.C.C. September 2, 1886 (Ashelford).—
Kidney, white, eyes full, skin rough ; handsome, medium size ;
heavy crop, free from disease ; moderate haulm. Early.
21. Famous, A.M. July 31, 1896 (Ross).—Oval to kidney,
white, eyes full; large; very heavy crop, free from disease ;
moderate haulm. LHarly.
22. Goldfinder (Carter).—Oval, white, eyes full; medium
size; good crop, slightly diseased; tall haulm. Late.
23. Guinivere (Fletcher).—Round, white, eyes full; skin
rough ; good crop, free from disease; tall haulm. Midseason or
late.
276 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
24, Hallamshire Hero (Hughes).—Round to oval, white,
eyes full, skin rough ; heavy crop, free from disease ; tall haulm.
Late. j
25. Hampshire County Alderman (Dibbens).—Round, white,
eyes deeply set ; very large; very heavy crop, free from disease ;
tallhaulm. Late.
26. Harbinger, A.M. August 5, 1897 (Sutton).—Round,
white, eyes full; medium size; very heavy crop, free from
disease; short haulm. Very early. The quality was excellent
when cooked.
27. Howlett’s Early (Hurst).—Roundish oval, white, eyes
shallow; large; heavy crop, slightly diseased ; moderate haulm.
Karly.
28. Horsford’s Seedling, x x x September 8, 1897 (Hors-
ford, Vermont, U.S.A.).—Roundish oval, white, eyes full;
large; very heavy crop, free from disease; short haulm. Mid-
season.
29. Improved Royal Jersey Fluke (Ashelford).—Long kidney,
white, eyes full; very large; moderate crop, much diseased ;
tall haulm. Late. Same as International. .
30. Ivo, x x x September 8, 1897 (Curtois).—Kidney,
white, eyes full; medium size; very heavy crop, free from
disease ; tall haulm. Midseason. This variety was of first-rate
flavour when cooked.
31. Lewis’s Red (Butcher).—Round, red, uneven in size,
eyes shallow; moderate crop, free from disease; tall haulm.
Late.
82. Leece’s Seedling (Leece).—Roundish oval, eyes full,
rough skin; large; good crop, free from disease; tall haulm.
Late.
38. Lincolnshire Ashleaf (Wright).—Kidney, white, eyes
full; medium size, good crop, free from disease; short haulm.
Karly.
34. Morning Star (Cooper).—Kidney, white, eyes full;
large; good crop, free from disease ; short haulm. Late.
35. Ne Plus Ultra (Sutton).—Roundish oval, white, eyes
shallow; large; heavy crop, free from disease ; moderate haulm.
Rather early.
36. New EKarly Frame (Hurst)—Not a success, most of the
tubers failing to grow.
REPORT ON POTATOS AT CHISWICK, 1897. 277
37. Ninety Fold (Sutton).—Kidney, white, eyes full;
medium to large; very heavy crop, slightly diseased; short
haulm. Midseason.
38. No. 71 (J. Veitch).—Round, white, eyes full; good crop,
free from disease; moderate haulm. Midseason.
39. Perfection (Sutton).—Roundish oval, white, eyes full ;
large ; heavy crop, free from disease; short haulm. Late.
40. Pierremont (Hurst, Kent & Brydon).—Round, white, eyes
deeply set; large; very heavy crop, free from disease; moderate
haulm. Late.
41. Pierce’s Red Kidney (Benbow).—Kidney, purplish red,
eyes full; very heavy crop, free from disease; tall haulm.
Late.
42. Pierce’s Success (Benbow).—Roundish oval, very white,
eyes full; moderate crop, free from disease ; tall haulm. Late.
43. Pink-eyed Perfection (Wiles)—Round, white, with pink
eyes somewhat deeply set; moderate crop, free from disease ;
tall haulm. Late.
44. Queen’s Diamond Jubilee No. 2 (Dibbens).—Roundish
oval, pale pink, eyes full; moderate crop, free from disease ;
moderate haulm. Midseason.
45. Queen’s Diamond Jubilee No. 3 (Dibbens).—Kidney,
white, rough skin, eyes full; heavy crop, free from disease ; tall
haulm. Late.
46. Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Garnet (Dibbens).—Kidney,
white; most extraordinary crop of very small tubers, none of
which were large enough for use; tall haulm. Late.
47. Ringleader (Sutton).—Kidney, white, eyes full; rather
small; good crop, free from disease; short haulm. Early.
48. Rose Lily (Ashelford),—Roundish oval, white, eyes
shallow ; medium size ; moderate crop, free from disease ; short
haulm. Early.
49. Satisfaction, A.M. September 10, 1895 (Sutton).—
Roundish oval, white, eyes full, rough skin; very heavy crop,
free from disease; tall haulm. Late.
50. Seedling (Reven’s).—Kidney, white, eyes full ; moderate
crop, free from disease ; tall haulm. Late.
51. Seedling (Harraway & Scott).—Oval to kidney, white,
eyes full; heavy crop, free from disease; tall haulm. Late.
52. Seedling (Bankes).—Roundish oval, white, eyes full,
278 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
rough skin, and handsome; heavy crop, free from disease ; tall
haulm. Late. 7
53. Supreme, x x November 5, 1897 (Sutton).—Kidney, —
white, eyes full; heavy crop, free from disease ; moderate haulm.
Midseason.
54. Sir Lancelot (Fletcher).— Round, red, large, eyes shallow,
rough skin; heavy crop, free from disease; moderate haulm.
Late.
55. Sutton’s Al (Sutton).—Roundish oval, pale yellow,
eyes shallow; very heavy crop, free from disease; moderate
haulm. Early.
56. Syon Maincrop (Wythes).—Roundish oval, white, large,
rough skin, eyes shallow; very heavy crop, free from disease ;
tall haulm. Late.
57. The Topman (Sim).—Kidney, white, eyes full, rough
skin ; heavy crop, much diseased; short haulm. Early.
58. The Topper (Gilbert)—Roundish oval, white, eyes full ;
good crop, free from disease; tall haulm.. Late.
59. Triumph, F.C.C. September 12, 1893 (Sutton).—Round
to oval, white, eyes full; very heavy crop, free from disease ;
tall haulm. Late.
60. Waite’s Seedling No. 1 (Waite)—Round, white, eyes
full, rough skin ; heavy crop, free from disease ; moderate haulm.
Late.
61. White Beauty of Hebron (Sutton).—Similar to Beauty
of Hebron, except in colour, and a heavier cropper at Chiswick.
62. Windsor Castle, F.C.C. September 12, 1893 (Sutton).—
Roundish oval, white, eyes shallow, rough skin, handsome ;
very heavy crop; moderate haulm. Late.
63. Wythes’ Seedling Kidney (Wythes)—White, eyes full;
large ; moderate crop, free from disease ; rather short haulm.
Midseason.
Experiments were made with sixteen varieties to test (1) the
difference between earthing and non-earthing; (2) the rubbing
away of all sprouts, and the careful preserving of all sprouts,
Thus (1) one row was earthed up, one row non-earthed up ;
(2) one row of the seed tubers was planted with the sprouts
intact, and one row with all the sprouts rubbed off—the same
variety being of course employed in each case. In the whole of
the sixteen varieties so tested, there was absolutely no difference
REPORT ON BORECOLE AND KALES GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 2'79
apparent in either experiment, either in the size of the tubers
or in the weight of the crop. In fact the only difference was
that those tubers planted without sprouts were a little later in
maturing their crop. The following varieties were experimented
with :—Bonus, Bonnie Blush, Britannia, Cockerill’s Seedling,
Congress, Conqueror, Early Ashleaf, Late Perfection, Magistrate,
Murphy, Nonpareil, Perfection, Reine des Polders, Saxon,
Triumph, and Veitch’s No. 73.
REPORT ON BORECOLE AND KALES GROWN
AT CHISWICK, 1897.
Forty-seven stocks of the above were received for trial, and
sown March 29. In every case the germination was good, and
the young plants were put out three feet apart each way, and two
rows of each, on soil that had grown no previous vegetable crop
for very many years, the ground having been occupied with very
old fruit trees. The trees were removed, and the ground trenched
from two to three feet deep and well manured during the spring
of 1897. The plants all made excellent growth up to the middle
of July; then a fungus attacked the foliage and stems of the
Asparagus, Buda, and Ragged Jack section, causing the whole
to rot, and creating a great stench, whilst the Curled Kales
planted side by side with them were perfectly healthy and free
from attack.
F.C.C.=First Class Certificate.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
x xX X =Highly Commended.
x x =Commended.
1, 2, 3. Asparagus (Nutting, Hurst)._-All three stocks
diseased.
4,5, 6. Buda (Nutting, J. Veitch, Hurst).—All diseased.
7. Brydon’s Selected Green Curled, x x x November 5, 1897
(Kent & Brydon).—Medium height; light green leaves; strong
growth. The most densely curled variety in the collection. A
fine strain.
8. Chou de Milan, x x x November 5, 1897 (Watkins &
Simpson).—Tall, branching, vigorous, not curled. An excellent
strain of this hardy variety.
280 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
9. Chou de Burghley (Watkins & Simpson).—Diseased.
10. Couve Tronchuda (Watkins & Simpson).—Dwarf, resem-
bling a loose Cabbage ; fine flavour when cooked. Most suited
for autumn cutting, as it is rather tender.
11, 12, 18. Cottagers (Turner, Hurst, J. Veitch).—All three
stocks diseased. ©
14. Cottagers, x x x November 5, 1897 (Watkins & Simp-
son).—Tall, branching; very vigorous, and free from disease.
A very fine strain.
15. Culzean Castle, x x x November 5, 1897 (Hurst).—
Medium height; dark green leaves, densely curled; vigorous.
An excellent stock of this favourite variety.
16. Cuthbertson’s Famous Strain, x x x November 5, 1897
(Cuthbertson).—Very dwarf; dark green leaves, densely curled ;
vigorous. A very good strain.
17. Delaware Purple (Hurst).— Diseased.
18. Dobbie’s Dwarf Curled (Hurst).—Medium height ; dark
leaves, densely curled ; vigorous.
19. Drumhead (Hurst).—Very dwarf, with large hearts ;
leaves well curled; vigorous. Some of the plants were much
diseased.
20. Dwarf Green Curled (Nutting).—Dwarf; leaves well
curled; vigorous. A good stock of this well-known variety.
21. Dwarf Green Curled (Hurst).—Stock not true.
22. Dwarf Purple, x x November 5, 1897 (Dobbie).—Very
dwarf; long dark purple leaves, well curled; hardy and vigorous.
23. Exquisite Dwarf, Purple Curled, x x November 5, 1897
(Barr).—Same as No. 22.
24. Green Curled (Watkins & Simpson).—A taller form of
No. 18.
25. Hearting (Nutting)—Dwarf; leaves well curled;
vigorous, but showed no signs of hearting.
' 26. Improved Hearting (Harrison).—Medium height ; leaves
very large and coarse ; very vigorous, but irregular in growth.
27. Improved Hearting (Yates).—A dwarf form of No. 26.
28. Lapland (Nutting).—Diseased.
29. Late Hearting, x x x November 5, 1897 (Hurst).— Very
dwarf; leaves densely curled; large hearts. A fine and true stock.
30. Late Curled (J. Veitch).—Dwarf; leaves moderately
curled; branching vigorous. Good stock.
REPORT ON BORECOLE AND KALES GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 281
81. Moss Curled (Watkins & Simpson).—Tall; large leaves,
well curled ; branching.
32. New Hearting (Watkins & Simpson).—Dwarf; leaves
moderately curled ; medium-sized hearts; vigorous.
33. Phoenix (Hurst).—Diseased.
34. Purple Buda (Nutting).—Diseased.
35, 36, 37. Ragged Jack (Hurst, Watkins & Simpson, Nutting).
—All the stocks badly diseased.
38. Read’s Hearting, F.C.C. April 24, 1883 (Yates).—Medium
height; well curled; irregular in growth and requires further
selection.
39. Selected Curled (Yates).—Dwarf; densely curled leaves.
A very good strain, but rather irregular in growth.
40. Selected Variegated (Dobbie).—Requires more selection.
41. Syon Branching (Wythes).—Much diseased.
42. Tall Green Curled (Hurst).—Tall; large leaves, well
curled; strong in growth and rather coarse.
43. Tall Curled (J. Veitch).—See No. 42.
44, Variegated, A.M. February 12, 1889 (J. Veitch).— Medium
height; with beautifully marked leaves. The finest stock of
this variety in the collection.
45. Victoria, x x x November 5, 1897 (Dobbie).—Medium
height; dark green densely curled leaves; vigorous. A very fine
strain.
46. Variegated (Watkins and Simpson).—See No. 40.
47. Waite’s Dwarf Hearting (Cooper).—Dwarf; irregular in
foliage and growth. Requires further selection.
REPORT ON MISCELLANEOUS VEGETABLES GROWN
FOR TRIAL AT CHISWICK, 1897.
AUBERGINE. Sown March 17.
Solanum Melongina (syn. Maroo Baingau) (Bonavia).—A
very dwarf and fruitful variety of Aubergine, of excellent flavour
when cooked according to Dr. Bonavia’s receipt.
BEET. Sown June 3.
J. Dropmore Selected (Herrin).—Roots pyriform, dark red,
- medium size, with very short dark foliage.
K
2982 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
2. Nursery Beet (Long).—Roots long, dark red, rather large, _
with moderate dark foliage. a
3. Dewar’s Northumberland Short-top (Oliver).—Roots long, |
dark red, fine shape, with very short dark foliage. F
BRUSSELS Sprouts. Sown April 9.
1. Allsop’s (Allsop).—Medium height; sprouts of moderate
size, much inclined to burst.
2. Holborn Exhibition (Carter).—Tall; sprouts very large
and firm, leaves large and spreading. Z|
3. The Loades (Long).—Very similar to No. 2.
CucumBERS. Sown April 12.
1. Seedling (J. Goody).—A cross between Rollison’s Tele-
eraph and Duke of Edinburgh. Large, with prominent dark —
spines, and rough appearance. Heavy cropper.
2. Everard’s Prolific (Kent & Brydon).—Too closely resembles
Lockie’s Perfection to be considered distinct.
Carrots. Sown May 3.
1. Brydon’s Adiantum-leaved (Kent & Brydon). Foliage
very handsome, and useful for decorative work. Roots not of
good quality.
2. Red Elephant (Carter).—Roots long, red, handsome, but
not considered superior to varieties already in commerce.
CABBAGES. Sown April 9.
1. Cook’s Early (Harrison).—Large; heads firm, bluntly
conical, with a large spread of outer leaves. Stems short.
2. Cropp’s Early (Harrison).—Medium size; heads firm,
roundish, standing well without bursting. Moderate spread of
outer leaves. Stem short.
3. Dickson’s Perfection (Dicksons).—Medium to large; heads
firm, bluntly conical, with a small spread of outer leaves.
ScaRLET RuNNER Beans. Sown June 2.
1. Rivenhall Giant Painted Lady (Cooper, Taber & Co.).—A
very good selection of the popular Painted Lady.
2. The Jubilee (Wiles).—Pods long, of good shape, and freely
produced. Notconsidered any improvement on existing varieties.
_
REPORT ON TEA, HYBRID TEA, AND NOISETTE ROSES, 1897. 988
8. Waltham French Bean (Sharpe).—This is a climbing
French Bean of moderate height, producing an immense crop
of short pods.
ParsLEY. Sown April 9.
New Gem (Cuthbertson).—A good strain of the ordinary
type.
REPORT ON TEA, HYBRID TEA, AND NOISETTE
ROSES.
GROWN IN THE OPEN GROUND At CHISwicxk, 1897.
A collection of fifty-six varieties was grown in ordinary soil.
The plants were received in December 1894, but they did not
srow sufficiently well to merit inspection during the summer of
1895. In 1896 they grew well, but, as the summer was so hot
and dry, the Floral Committee decided that it would be advisable
to continue the trial in 1897. This year the plants grew well,
flowered abundantly, and were free from mildew and insect pests.
The Committee inspected the growing plants on several occasions,
and recommended Awards of Merit to nine varieties.
F.C.C.=First Class Certificate.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
1. Alba Rosea (Tea) (Prince).—Vigorous grower ; very free,
flowering; flowers cream white, shaded pink in the centre.
Beautiful in the bud state.
2. Amazone (Tea) (Prince, Rumsey).—Moderate grower ;
flowers deep lemon yellow, changing to sulphur yellow with age.
3. Anna Olivier (Tea) (Mount, Rumsey).—Moderate grower ;
flowers large, of good form, flesh colour, reverse of petals shaded
rose.
4, Augustine Halem, AM. July 5, 1897 (Hybrid Tea)
(W. Paul).—Vigorous grower, of good habit; very free flowering ;
flowers large, globular, rosy carmine. :
5. Bouquet d’Or (Noisette) (Dicksons).—Very vigorous
grower ; free flowering ; flowers large, full, yellow, shaded rose.
6. Catherine Mermet (Tea) (Rumsey).—Good grower; free
flowering ; flowers large, full, globular, pale pink, suffused with
yellow.
K 2
984 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
7. Clara Watson, A.M. April 7, 1896 (Hybrid Tea) (Prince)—
Vigorous grower; flowers very large, of excellent form, pale pink,
salmon centre. A continuous bloomer.
8. Comtesse de Breteuil (W. Paul).—Did not flower.
9. Comtesse de Nadaillac (Tea) (Veitch, Prior).—Moderate
grower; flowers large, of good form, rosy salmon pink, deeper
towards base of petals. Very beautiful.
10. Comtesse Riza du Pare (Tea) (Rumsey).—Vigorous |
grower; free flowering; flowers large, full, bright rose changing
to pink.
11. Edmond Sablayrolles, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Tea) (Veitch).—
Good grower; very free flowering; crimson, shaded with carmine.
Beautiful in bud state. Opens wide, and soon fades.
12. Ernest Metz (Tea) (Prince).—Vigorous grower; free
flowering ; flowers large and of good form, rosy carmine, brighter
centre. Very handsome.
18. Ethel Brownlow (Tea) (Prior)—Not a very strong |
grower; flowers of good shape, rose, shaded yellow. Very |
distinct.
14, Etendard de Jeanne d’Arc, F.C.C. April 22, 1884 (Tea)
(Rumsey).—Vigorous grower; free flowering; flowers cream
white, touched with pink.
15. Etoile de Lyon. F.C.C. May 12, 1885 (Tea) (Rumsey,
Dicksons, Veitch).—Vigorous, sturdy grower; very free flowering;
flowers large, of good form, sulphur yellow, brighter in centre.
Stands drought well.
16. Francesca Kruger, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Tea) (Mount, |
Prince, Rumsey, Dicksons).— Vigorous grower; very free flower-
ing; flowers of good form, large, coppery yellow, shaded with rose.
17. Germaine de Mareste (Tea) (W. Paul).—Vigorous grower ; _
moderately free flowering; flowers large, full, perfect shape,
cream white, centre shaded salmon.
18. Grand Duc de Luxembourg, A.M. May 19, 1896 (Hybrid
Tea) (W. Paul).—Very vigorous grower; very free flowering ;
flowers large, rosy red, bright centre, exterior of petals brilliant
jake. A very fine variety.
19. Gustave Regis, A.M. June 21, 1892 (Hybrid Tea)
(Dicksons).—Vigorous grower; flowers canary yellow, exterior
of petals deeper yellow, distinct and beautiful. Early bloomer.
20. Homére (Tea) (Dicksons)—Good grower; very free
;
REPORT ON TEA, HYBRID TEA, AND NOISETTE ROSES, 1897. 285
flowering ; flowers soft pink, petals edged with rose. A distinct
variety, but seldom opening satisfactorily.
21. Hon. Edith Gifford, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Tea) (Veitch).—
_ Vigorous grower; flowers large, full, flesh colour, shaded pink.
~ Continuous bloomer, and stands drought well.
22. Innocente Pirola, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Tea) (Mount,
Prior, Veitch, Prince).—Vigorous grower; exceptionally free
flowering; flowers large, globular, cream white, deeper centre.
Very beautiful in the bu. state.
23. Isabella Sprunt (Tea) (Dicksons, Rumsey).— Good
grower; very early and free flowering; flowers sulphur yellow.
A first-rate buttonhole Rose.
24, Jean Ducher (Tea) (Rumsey).—Moderately free grower ;
flowers large, globular, full, pale lemon, shaded with rose.
25. Le Soleil (Tea) (W. Paul).—Vigorous grower; flowers
large, full, canary yellow.
26. Ma Capucine (Tea) (Prior).—Moderate grower ; rather
shy bloomer ; flowers coppery yellow, shaded red.
27. Madame Bérard (Tea) (Dicksons).—Moderate grower ;
free flowering ; flowers large, well formed, salmon yellow.
28. Madame Caroline Kuster (Noisette) (Rumsey).—Vigorous
grower ; moderately free flowering ; flowers large, canary yellow,
exterior of petals pink.
29. Madame Charles (Tea) (Rumsey).—Vigorous grower;
free flowering ; flowers large, globular, clear apricot yellow.
Beautiful in the bud state.
_ 80. Madame Chedane Guinoisseau (Tea) (Rumsey).—Mode-
rate grower ; free flowering ; flowers canary-yellow, deeper centre,
_ A first-rate buttonhole Rose.
31. Madame de Watteville (Tea) (Dicksons, Prince).—Mode-
rate grower ; flowers cream white, edged with rose. Exceedingly
pretty and effective.
32. Madame H. Jamain (Tea) (Rumsey).— Vigorous grower ;
flowers large, white, coppery yellow centre.
33. Madame Lambard (Tea) (Dicksons, Rumsey, Mount).—
Moderate grower; very free flowering; flowers large, full, splendid
shape, rich pink, flushed with rose. Karly bloomer.
34. Madame Margottin, F.C.C. April 2, 1873 (Tea) (Rumsey).
—Vigorous grower ; flowers lemon yellow, shaded with pink in
the centre.
986 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
35. Madame Pernet Ducher, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Hybrid Tea) —
(W. Paul).—Vigorousgrower; very free flowering ; flowers large,
canary yellow, varying to pure white. A continuous bloomer.
36. Madame P. Perney (Tea) (W. Paul).—Moderate grower; —
very free flowering; flowers saffron yellow, varying to pale yellow. —
A good late bloomer.
87. Madame Victor Caillet (Tea) (W. Paul). — Vigorous
erower ; rather shy bloomer; flowers coppery rose, shaded with —
salmon. Late bloomer.
88. Madeline d’Aoust (Tea) (Veitch).—Moderate arden
rather shy bloomer ; flowers pale yellow, suffused with pink.
39. Mdlle. aurea de Beauvau (Tea) (W. Paul).—Very
vigorous grower; flowers large, full, rich yellow. A first-rate
autumn bloomer. : |
40. Marie Guillot (Tea) (Dicksons).—Very vigorous grower ;
very free flowering; flowers large, white, shaded with delicate
pink in the centre. Good late bloomer.
41. Marie van Houtte, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Tea) (Mount
Dicksons).—Good grower; very free flowering; flowers of good
form, sulphur yellow, outer petals rose. Very distinct and hand-
some. Continuous bloomer. One of the very best of garden
Roses.
42. Niphetos (Tea) (Prior, Veitch, Dicksons)—Weak grower;
buds long, white, shaded with lemon in centre. Nota success in
the open ground.
_ 48. Paul Narbonnand, A.M. July 27, 1897 (Tea) (W. Paul). a
Vigorous grower ; rather shy bloomer ; flowers large, full, bright
pink.
44, Perle des Jardins (Tea) (Veitch).—Moderate grower,
free flowering: flowers large, full, canary yellow, centre deep ;
yellow.
45. Pink Rover (Hybrid Tea) (W. Paul).—Very vigorous
erower ; free flowering; flowers large, full, of good form, pale
pink, deeper centre. Very handsome and sweet scented.
46. Princess of Wales, F.C.C. June 12, 1883 (Tea)(Prince).—
Moderate grower; free flowering; flowers large, soft yellow,
flushed with rosy pink. A grand variety.
47. Rubens (Tea) (Rumsey).—Vigorous grower; very free
flowering; flowers of excellent form, white, suffused with rose- —
yellowish centre.
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 287
48. Safrano (Tea) (Rumsey, Dicksons).—Moderate grower ;
very free flowering; flowers rich apricot changing to buff. A
beautiful buttonhole Rose.
49. Souvenir de Paul Néron, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Tea)
(Mount, Rumsey, Veitch)—Vigorous grower; free flowering ;
flowers large, of good form, cream white, margined and shaded
with rose pink. A good autumn bloomer.
50. Souvenir de §. A. Prince, F.C.C. June 11, 1889 (Tea)
(Veitch)—Moderate grower; free flowering; flowers white,
suffused with pink on the outer petals.
51. Sunset, F.C.C. June 24,1884 (Tea) (Dicksons).— Vigorous
srower; free flowering; flowers of good form, deep apricot
yellow. A good late-flowering variety.
52. The Bride, F.C.C. March 8, 1887 (Tea) (Dicksons),—
Moderate grower; moderately free flowering; flowers white,
suffused with pink. Better suited for pot culture.
58. The Meteor (Tea) (Veitch).—Vigorous grower; free
flowering ; flowers large, deep crimson. Very distinct.
54. Viscountess Folkestone (Hybrid Tea) (Veitch).— Vigorous
grower ; free flowering; flowers large, creamy pink, salmon pink
centre. A most beautiful garden Rose.
55. White Lady, A.M. May 3, 1892 (Hybrid Tea) (W. Paul).
—Vigorous grower; very free flowering; flowers large, full,
flesh colour changing to cream white. Very early bloomer.
56. W. A. Richardson, A.M. July 5, 1897 (Noisette) (Prior,
Dicksons).—Vigorous grower; flowers borne in dense clusters,
rich apricot fading to pale yellow. Good as a bud, but not
satisfactory otherwise.
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING
CHRYSANTHEMUMS.
GROWN IN THE OPEN GROUND AT CHISWICK, 1897.
Accollection of 141 stocks of Chrysanthemums was planted in
fairly rich soil on a sunny border on May 26, the distance between
the rows being three feet, and the plants two feet apart in the
rows. The whole of the collection made excellent growth,
showing the true character of each variety. They made a mag-
nificent display of bloom, and were greatly admired by visitors to
988 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the gardens. The object of the trial was to determine the height, ©
habit, time of flowering, and usefulness of each variety for —
decorative border purposes. All the varieties were grown
naturally, one stake being supplied to each plant to keep it in
place. The collection was examined by the Floral Committee
on five occasions, who recommended four Awards of Merit and
highly commended thirty-nine.
F.C.C.—First Class Certificate.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
x x x =Highly Commended.
1. Abbé Duale (Jap.) (Jones).
2. A. Gabey (Jap.) (Jones).
These varieties had not come into flower on October 25.
3. Albert Chausson (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 4 feet; loose
habit ; flowers large, orange red, yellow reverse. In flower
October 1.
4, Alex. Defour (Jap.) (Divers).—Height 2 feet 6 inches ;
moderately free flowing; flowers flat, rich purple. In flower
October 19.
5. Alice Butcher (Pom.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Dobbie,
Divers, Cannell, Barr).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; good habit ;
very free flowering; flowers red, suffused with orange. In flower
September 23.
6. Ambrose Thomas (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 3 feet 6 inches ;
straggling habit; flowers large, crimson purple. In flower
September 18.
7. American Star (Ref.) (Jones)—Height 2 feet; bushy
habit; very free flowering; flowers blush pink, tinged with
purple. In flower September 25.
8. Anastasia (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Barr).—
Height 20 inches, very bushy; very free flowering; flowers rosy
purple. In flower August 30.
9. Arthur Crepey (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet 6 inches,
good habit ; flowers canary yellow, outer petals sulphur yellow.
In flower September 4.
10. Baronne G. C. de Briailles (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height
2 feet 6inches ; good habit; free flowering; flowers semi-double,
cream white, shaded with pink. In flower September 15.
11. Blanche Colomb (Ref.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Barr).—
é
\
|
.
q
:
ia
!
bl .
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 289
Height 2 feet; bushy habit; free flowering; flowers sulphur
yellow. In flower September 23.
12. Blanc Précoce (Ref.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet; bushy
habit; flowers blush, petals tipped with pink. In flower
October 15.
13. Blushing Bride (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Dobbie, Cannell, Divers).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; good habit ;
very free flowering ; flowers lilac, shading to white. In flower
August 28.
14. Bouquet AXstival (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 3 feet; bushy
habit; free flowering; flowers flat, rosy purple. In flower
October 10.
15. Bronze Blushing Bride (Pom.), x x x September 17,
1897 (Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).—Height 2 feet 9 inches; good
habit ; very free flowering; flowers rosy lilac, tipped with gold.
In flower September 4.
16. Bronze Prince (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Jones).—
Height 2 feet 6 inches; slender habit; very free flowering; flowers
old gold colour. In flower September 23.
17. California (Ref.) (Barr).—Height 20 inches; bushy habit;
free flowering ; flowers large, clear yellow. In flower October 6.
18. Canari (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Barr).—Height 18 inches; very bushy, compact habit; very free
flowering ; flowers lemon yellow. In flower September 12.
19. Crimson Précocité (Pom.) (Dobbie, Barr, Divers).—
Height 2 feet 6 inches; very bushy habit; free flowering; flowers
crimson, tipped with gold. In flower October 20.
20. Chevalier Ange Bandiera (Jap.) (Cannell, Barr).—Height
3 feet; vigorous, sturdy habit; very free flowering; flowers
large, pink, suffused with purple, silvery reverse. In flower
September 17.
21. Claret Belle (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 3 feet 6 inches;
straggling habit; moderately free flowering; flowers crimson,
yellow reverse. In flower August 30.
22. Commandant Schneider (Barr)—Had not come into
flower on October 25.
23. Coral Queen (Jap.) (Dobbie):—Height 4 feet; loose habit;
moderately free flowering; flowers large, of a beautiful coral
colour. In flower September 13.
24. Comtesse Foucher de Cariel (Ref.), A.M. October 22,
290 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
1897 (Barr, Dobbie).—-Height 2 feet; bushy habit; very free
flowering ; flowers orange, yellow reverse. In flower October 10.
25. De la Bouére (Ref.) (Jones).—Height 3 feet 6 inches;
moderately free flowering; flowers rich claret colour. In flower
October 18.
26. Dodo (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Cannell).—
Height 1 foot; very bushy, flat habit; very free flowering; flowers
canary yellow. In flower September 3.
27. Dorcis (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet; flowers large,
cream white, shaded with pink. In flower October 1.
28. Edie Wright (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Dobbie,
Jones).—Height 3 feet; good habit; very free flowering;
flowers large, rosy purple shading to pink. In flower Sep-
tember 24.
29. Karly Blush (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Barr).— Height 15 inches; bushy, compact habit; very free
flowering; flowers lilac pink, centre white. In flower
August 18.
30. Edith Syratt (Jap.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell).—Height 2 feet 3 inches; free flowering; flowers
purple. In flower July 20.
31. Edith Owen (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet; flowers
soft pink, silvery reverse. In flower October 18.
32. Edwin Rowbottom (Jap.) (Divers).—Height 3 feet; good
habit; free flowering; flowers large, canary yellow. In flower
October 5.
33. Fiberta (Pom.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Divers, Barr,
Cannell).—Height 2 feet; bushy, compact habit; very free
flowering; flowers rich canary yellow. In flower August 20.
34. Flora (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie, Can-
nell, Divers, Barr).—Height 20 inches; bushy habit; very free
flowering ; flowers golden yellow. In fiower July 20.
35. Francois Vuillermet (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 2 feet;
bushy habit; flowers flat, rosy purple. In flower September 21.
36. Frederick Marronet (Pom.) (Cannell, Barr).—Height
18 inches; bushy habit; free flowering ; flowers orange yellow.
In flower September 1.
87. Fred Pele (Pom.) (Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).—Height 2 feet ;
straggling habit ; moderately free flowering ; flowers dull purplish
crimson, tipped with gold. In flower September 38.
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 29]
88. General Hawkes (Jap.), A.M. October 4, 1892 (Dobbie).—
Height 3 feet 6 inches; very free flowering ; flowers large, rich
purple ; silvery reverse. In flower October 1.
39. George Menier (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 3 feet; slender
habit; flowers rich purple. In flower September 17.
40. G. Wermig (Jap.), F.C.C. October 14, 1884 (Dobbie,
Divers, Cannell).—Height 3 feet; good habit; very free flower-
ing; flowers deep yellow, outer petals soft yellow. In flower
September 1.
41. Gloire d’Astaford (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 4 feet; loose
strageling habit; free flowering; flowers orange scarlet. In
flower October 6.
42. Gloire de Mezin (Jap.) (Dobbie, Barr).—Height 4 feet ;
straggling habit; free flowering; flowers very large, chestnut
red. In flower October 16.
43. Golden Drop (Pom.) (Barr).—Height 18 inches; bushy
habit; very free flowering; flowers rich canary yellow. In
flower August 20.
44, Golden Fleece (Ref.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell).—Height 2 feet; bushy habit; flowers golden yellow,
running to a lighter shade with age. In flower July 19.
45. Grace Attick (Pom.) (Divers).—Height 18 inches; very
free flowering ; flowers canary yellow. In flower August 24.
46. Harvest Home (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Barr).—
Height 2 feet 6 inches; good habit; free flowering; flowers
large, bronze red tipped with gold, yellow reverse. In flower
September 27.
47. Harvest Queen (Ref.) (Jones).—Height 2 feet 6 inches ;
bushy habit ; flowers cream white. In flower October 10.
48. Illustration (Pom.) (Barr).—Height 15 inches; bushy
habit; free flowering ; flowers blush white. In flower August 23.
49. Ivy Elphic (Jap.) (Dobbie, Jones).—Height 2 feet; bushy
habit; moderately free flowering; flowers large, white suffused
with pink. In flower October 8.
50. Ivy Stark (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Jones).—
Height 2 feet 6 inches; bushy habit; very free flowering ;
flowers large, pale orange yellow. In flower September 21.
51. Jacintha (Pom.) (Dobbie).—Height 20 inches; bushy
habit; moderately free flowering ; flowers rose lilac. In flower
July 22.
992. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
52. Jeanne Vuillermet (Jap.) (Cannell).—Height 4 feet
6 inches; straggling habit; flowers semi-double, colour dull
crimson. In flower October 8.
53. Lady Fitzwygram (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell, Divers, Barr).—Height 20 inches; bushy, sturdy
grower; very free flowering; flowers large, pure white. In
flower September 27.
54. La Luxembourg (Pom.) (Dobbie).—Height 18 inches;
bushy habit; free flowering; flowers orange yellow. In flower
August 30.
55. L’Ami Condorcet (Pom.), A.M. September 17, 1897
(Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).—Height 15 inches; very bushy, com-
pact habit; very free flowering; flowers soft yellow, deeper
centre, very fine. In flower August 18.
56. La Perle (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet; moderately
free flowering ; flowers pearly white. In flower October 14.
56a. La Vierge (Ref.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell, Divers)—Height 2 feet; bushy, sturdy habit; free
flowering; flowers white, suffused with pink. In flower
September 24.
57. Lemon Yellow (Jap.) (Cannell).—Height 3 feet; erect
habit; flowerslemon yellow. In flower September 10.
58. Lemon Queen (Ref.) (Jones).—Height 2 feet 6 inches ;
bushy habit; very free flowering; flowers old gold colour. In
flower October 12.
59. Le Poéte des Chrysanthémes (Ref.) (Dobbie, Cannell).—
Height 3 feet 9 inches; loose straggling habit; free flowering ;
flowers rose, shaded with purple. In flower September 10.
60. Little Bob (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Barr).—Height 2 feet; bushy habit; very free flowering ;
flowers deep red, fading to brick red. In flower August 20. This
variety was received under the name of Scarlet Gem.
61. Longfellow (Pom.), A.M. September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell, Barr).—Height 2 feet 9 inches; bushy habit; very free
flowering; flowers blush white, exterior of petals pink. In
flower July 19.
62. Lutea (Jap.) (Jones)—Height 3 feet 6 inches; loose
straggling habit; moderately free flowering; flowers primrose
yellow with a deeper centre. In flower October 16.
63. Lyon (Pom.) (Dobbie, Cannell).—Height 3 feet ; vigorous
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 293
erower; moderately free flowering; flowers rosy purple. In
flower September 18.
64. Madame A. Colmiche (Pom.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet
6 inches; loose straggling habit; moderately free flowering ;
flowers reddish orange with fimbriated petals. In flower
October 14.
65. Madame A. Nonin (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 3 feet; bushy
habit; moderately free flowering ; flowers pink, striped with
white ; petals beautifully fimbriated. In flower October 18.
66. Madame C. Desgranges (Jap.), x x x September 17
1897 (Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; bushy
habit ; very free flowering; flowers large, of good shape, cream
white, lighter guard petals. In flower August 16.
67. Madame E. Lefort (Pom.), A.M. October 6, 1891 (Cannell,
Divers, Barr)—Height 2 feet; good habit; free flowering;
flowers fimbriated, old gold, shaded with red. In flower
September 15.
68. Madame Gabus (Pom.) (Dobbie, Cannell).— Height 2 feet
6 inches; bushy habit; moderately free flowering; flowers
rosy lilac and white. In flower September 3.
69. Madame Gajac (Jap.), x x x October 22, 1897 (Jones).—
Height 2 feet; bushy habit; free flowering; flowers mauve,
silvery reverse. In flower October 2.
70. Madame Gastellier (Jap.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Cannell, Divers).—Height 2 feet ; bushy habit; free flowering ;
flowers creamy white. In flower August 21.
71. Madame H. Jacotot (Jap.), F.C.C. November 13, 1883
(Dobbie, Jones).—Height 3 feet; shy bloomer; flowers large,
purplish pink, suffused with white. In flower October 20.
72. Madame Jolivart (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).—Height 18 inches; very bushy habit ;
very free flowering ; flowers white, shaded with pink. In flower
September 3.
73. Madame L. Collier (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet
6 inches; loose habit; free flowering; flowers orange yellow.
In flower October 6.
74. Madame Eulalie Morel (Jap.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Cannell, Barr).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; very free flowering ;
flowers cerise, shaded with gold. In flower August 28.
75. Madame Léon Lassala (Ref.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet ;
294 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
bushy habit ; free flowering; flowers creamy white. In flower
September 14.
76. Madame Louis Lionnet (Jap.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Divers, Barr).—Height 2 feet 6 inches ; bushy habit ; very free
flowering ; flowers salmon pink. In flower September 10.
77. Madame Max Duffose (Jap.) (Jones, Barr).—Height
3 feet 6 inches ; loose habit ; flowers very large, crimson, golden
reverse. In flower October 15.
78. Madame Marie Masse (Jap.), x x x September 17,
1897 (Dobbie, Cannell, Divers, Barr).—Height 2 feet; bushy
habit; free flowering; flowers large, lilac mauve. In flower
August 27.
79. Madame Picoul (Pom.) (Cannell, Barr).—Height
18 inches; bushy habit ; very free flowering; flowers rosy lilac.
In flower August 13.
80. Madame Zephir Lionnet (Ref.) (Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).—
Height 3 feet 3 inches; spreading habit; very free flowering ;
flowers orange red, tipped with gold. In flower September 18.
81. Madlle. Francoise van Leaveau (Jap.) (Cannell).—Height
4 feet; straggling habit; flowers rich purple. In flower
October 8.
82. Madlle. Guindudeau (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897
(Jones).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; bushy, spreading habit ;
flowers large, pink, suffused with purple. In flower Sep-
tember 21. .
83. Madlle. Sabatier (Jap.), x x x October 22, 1897 (Jones).—
Height 4 feet ; straggling habit ; flowers purplish crimson. In
flower October 15.
84. Maria (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet 9 inches; loose
habit; very free flowering; flowers flat, purple. In flower
September 14. ,
85. Martinmas (Ref.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Divers, Dobbie,
Barr).— Height 3 feet ; good habit; free flowering ; flowers pink,
silvery reverse. In flower September 24.
86. Massi Faire (Jap.) (Jones)—Height 3 feet; bushy
habit ; flowers flat, deep rose pink. In flower October 21.
87. Maud Pitcher (Pom.), A.M. August 27, 1889 (Barr).—
Height 20 inches; moderately free flowering; flowers bronze
yellow. In flower August 30.
88. Miss Davis (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie).—
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 295
Height 3 feet 6 inches; vigorous grower; flowers soft pink,
tipped with blush white. In flower September 15.
89. Mrs. Burrell (Jap.); F.C.C. August 10, 1886 (Cannell,
Dobbie).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; vigorous grower; very free
flowering ; flowers large, soft yellow, deeper centre. In flower
September 1.
90. Mrs, A. J. Parker (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 4 feet ; loose
straggling habit ; flowers large, pink, suffused with salmon. In
flower October 21.
91. Mrs. Cullingford (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Dobbie, Cannell).—Height 3 feet 6 inches; sturdy habit; very
free flowering; flowers blush white. In flower September 8.
92. Mrs. Gifford (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 4 feet 6 inches;
loose habit ; flowers, pink. In flower October 8.
93. Mrs. Hawkins (Jap.), F.C.C. September 11, 1888 (Dobbie,
Divers, Barr)—Height 2 feet 6 inches; bushy habit; very
free flowering; flowers large, rich golden yellow. In flower
August 30. )
94. Mrs. J. R. Pitcher (Jap.) (Divers, Barr).—Height 2 feet
9 inches; loose habit; free flowering; flowers blush white,
shaded with pink. In flower September 3.
95. Mr. Selly (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie,
Barr).— Height 18 inches; very bushy, compact habit: very
free flowering; flowers rosy pink. In flower August 380.
96. Mr. W. Piercy (Pom.) (Barr).— Height 15 inches; com-
pact habit; free flowering; flowers orange red. In flower
August 13.
97. Mignon (Pom.) (Divers)—Height 15 inches; bushy
habit; very free flowering; flowers rich yellow. In flower
August 21.
98. Mignonne (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 4 feet; straggling
habit; very free flowering; flowers large, light purple. In
flower October 10.
99. Mons. A. Dafour (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet;
straggling habit ; moderately free flowering ; flowers large, rose,
suffused with pink. In flower October 1.
100. Mons. A. Herlaut (Pom.) (Dobbie, Cannell).—Height
20 inches; spreading habit; very free flowering; flowers
fimbriated, red, shaded with purple and tipped with gold. In
flower October 2.
296 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. is.
101. Mons. Dupuis (Ref.) (Cannell, Jones, Barr).—Height
2 feet 9 inches; loose habit; moderately free flowering; flowers —
bronzy yellow. In flower August 17. 4
102. Mons. Foukabra (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 3 feet;
flowers semi-double, orange red, yellow reverse. In flower —
October 8.
103. Mons. Frederick Sysmayer (Jap.) (Cannell).—Height
4 feet; loose habit; flowers orange and gold. In flower
October 6.
104. Mons. G. Dubor (Jap.) (Cannell, Dobbie).—Height
4 feet; straggling habit; moderately free flowering; flowers
orange yellow, striped and suffused with red. In flower
October 6.
105. Mons. Gustave Grunnerwald (Jap.) (Cannell, Barr).—
Height 2 feet; good habit; very free flowering; flowers silvery
pink, shaded with rose. In flower August 11.
106. Montague (Jap.) (Dobbie, Cannell).—Height 4 feet ;
straggling habit; flowers purple crimson, silvery reverse. In
flower September 23.
107. M. Blackmann (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 4 feet 6 inches;
vigorous upright habit; flowers chestnut red. In flower
October 8.
108. M. Chanchard (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 3 feet; loose
habit ; moderately free flowering ; flowers orange scarlet, yellow
reverse. In flower October 10.
109. M. E. Pynaert van Geert (Jap.) (Cannell).—Height
3 feet; loose habit; flowers reddish orange. In flower
October 6.
110. M. F. L. Usmayer (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 4 feet ; loose
straggling habit; flowers large, orange red, tipped with gold.
In flower October 19.
111. M.J.Bte. Cauvin (Jap.) (Jones).—Height 3 feet 6 inches ;
straggling habit; flowers crimson, old gold reverse. In flower
October 1.
112. Mychett White (Jap.), A.M. September 17, 1897
(Jones).—Height 18 inches ; bushy habit; very free flowering ;
flowers large, pure white. In flower September 6.
113. Nanum (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Dobbie).—
Height 20 inches; very bushy compact habit; very free flower-
ing; flowers blush white. In flower September 3.
REPORT ON SUMMER AND EARLY-FLOWERING CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 297
114. Notaire Groz (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 4 feet; straggling
habit ; flowers pink. In flower October 5.
115. October Queen (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 2 feet 6 inches ;
loose habit; moderately free flowering; flowers pale salmon
suffused with terra cotta. In flower October 19.
116. October Yellow (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 2 feet 6 inches ;
bushy spreading habit; flowers deep canary yellow. in flower
October 8.
117. O. J. Quintas (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Similar to No. 99.
118. Orange Child (Jap.), x x x October 4, 1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell).—Height 3 feet 6 inches; bushy habit ; free flowering ;
flowers large, deep yellow. In flower September 17.
119. Petilland (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897 (Cannell,
Barr).—Height 2 feet ; bushy compact habit; very free flower-
ing; flowers cream white, yellow centre. In flower Septem-
ber 10.
120. Piercy’s Seedling (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Divers, Barr, Cannell, Dobbie).—Height 18 inches; very bushy
habit; very free flowering; flowers bronze yellow, shading to
orange. In flower August 27.
121, Précocité (Pom.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet; bushy
habit; very free flowering; flowers rich yellow. In flower
August 30.
122. Précocité Japonaise (Pom.) (Dobbie, Divers).—Height
2 feet; spreading habit; free flowering ; flowers lilac rose and
white. In flower September 20.
123. Rose Wells (Ref.), A.M. September 24, 1894 (Cannell,
Wells).—Height 15 inches; bushy habit; very free flowering ;
flowers rose pink. In flower September 7.
124. Ruby King (Jap.) (Jones, Barr).—Height 2 feet ;
bushy sturdy habit; very free flowering ; flowers rich crimson.
Tn flower October 4. This variety was also sent under the name
of Crimson Queen.
125. Ryecroft Glory (Jap.), A.M. October 24, 1893 (Divers,
Barr, Dobbie).—Height 3 feet; bushy habit; very free flower-
ing ; flowers large, orange yellow. In flower October 8.
126. St. Croats (Pom.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet; bushy
habit ; free flowering ; flowers light pink. In flower Septem-
ber 38.
127. St. Mary (Pom.) (Dobbie, Barr).—Height 20 inches;
L
298 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
bushy habit ; free flowering; flowers white, shaded with pink. —
In flower August 30. é'
128. Samuel Barlow (Jap.) (Divers, Barr).—Height 3 feet
G inches; free flowering; flowers large, rosy buff, tipped with
golden yellow. In flower August 27.
129. Silversmith (Ref.) (Dobbie).—Similar to No. 75.
130. Souvenir de A. P. Bouwman (Jap.) (Jones).—Height
4 feet 6 inches; loose straggling habit; moderately free flower-
ing; flowers rosy purple, silvery reverse. In flower October 19.
131. Souvenir de M. Menier. (Dobbie).—Had not come into
flower on October 25.
132. Strathmeath (Ref.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Dobbie, Cannell).—Height 2 feet; good bushy habit; very free
flowering ; flowers rose pink. In flower August 30.
133. Sunshine (Jap.), A.M. August 138, 1895 (Dobbie).—
Height 4 feet; straggling habit; moderately free flowering ;
flowers rich yellow. In flower October 2.
134. The Don (Jap.) (Barr).—Height 2 feet 3 inches;
flowers rich purple. In flower September 27.
135. Toreador (Pom.), x x x September 17,1897 (Dobbie,
Cannell).—Height 2 feet 3 inches; bushy habit; very free
flowering; flowers red, tipped with orange. In flower
August 28.
136. Vice-President Hardy (Jap.) (Dobbie, Cannell, Barr).
—Height 4 feet; loose habit; free flowering ; flowers orange
scarlet, yellow reverse. In flower October 1.
137. Vicomtesse d’Avéne (Jap.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet;
loose habit; very free flowering; flowers flat, purple, tipped
with rose. In flower September 2.
188. White Lady (Pom.) (Dobbie).—Height 2 feet; bushy
habit ; free flowering; flowers blush white, shading to pink.
139. White St. Croats (Pom.), x x x September 17, 1897
(Dobbie).—Height 2 feet ; bushy spreading habit; very free
flowering; flowers white. In flower September 3.
140. Yellow Gem (Pom.), A.M. October 15, 1895 (Cannell).—
Height 2 feet 6 inches; moderately free flowering; flowers
fimbriated, orange yellow. In flower September 24.
ANNUAL FLOWERS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897, 299
™ ANNUAL FLOWERS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897.
A cotiection of 379 stocks of Annuals was sown in rich and
deeply worked soil on May 7, but the seed germinated somewhat
irregularly. When the young plants were large enough, they
were thinned out to proper distances in order to show the dis-
tinctive character of each. The season was by no means fayour-
able to the proper development of Annuals, as it was so exces-
sively hot and dry, but in spite of the heat and drought the
plants made fairly good growth and flowered well. The Floral
Committee examined the various stocks on four occasions.
A.M.=Award of Merit.
x xX x =Highly Commended.
x x =Commended.
ASTERS.
1. Dwarf Chrysanthemum-flowered (Dobbie, Heinemann).—
Plants of bushy compact habit; very free flowering;
flowers large, perfectly double and of excellent shape. Height
9 inches to 1 foot. Useful for marginal lines. Shining brick
rose and white, x x x September 8, 1897 (Heinemann).
2. Victoria (Dobbie, Heinemann).—A very popular and useful
section. Plants of bushy habit; very free flowering; flowers
large, massive, supported on stout stems. MHeight 15 inches to
18 inches. The strain was commended September 6, 1888.
3. Dwarf Victoria (Dobbie).—Similar to the last, but dwarfer
and more compact. Height 9 inches to 1 foot. Bright rose,
tipped with white, x x x September 8, 1897. Plant of erect
habit. Height 10 inches.
4, Washington (Dobbie, Yates).—A very useful free-flowering
section. Flowers large, of good form, and variously coloured.
Height 15 inches.
5. Mignon (Dobbie).—Much the same as the Victoria, but
dwarfer, and the flowers borne with greater freedom. Height
1 foot to 15 inches.- White, x x x September 8, 1897.
6. Dwarf Queen (Heinemann).—Plants of compact habit ;
flowers very large and full. Height 9 inches to 1 foot. The
strain was Highly Commended August 24, 1888.
7. Giant Comet (Dobbie, Vilmorin).—A magnificent strain
L 2
800 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
with large variously coloured flowers, the petals long, broad,
drooping. Height 18 inches. The Bride, x x x September 8,
1897 (Dobbie). Flowers large, delicate pink, shading to white.
8. Dwarf Comet (Dobbie).—A dwarf selection of the last, but
of more pyramidal habit. Height 9 inches to 1 foot. |
9. Lilliput (Dobbie).—Plants of erect branching habit ; very
free flowering; flowers small, of rich and varied colours,
the centre petals beautifully quilled. Height 16 inches to
20 inches. The strain was Highly Commended September 5, 1889.
Lilliput Rose, x x x September 8, 1897. A charming variety.
Lilliput White, rose centre, x x x September 17, 1897.
10. Peony-flowered Perfection (Heinemann, Yates).—A very
useful group. Plants of branching, spreading habit; very free
flowering; flowers large, double, and beautifully incurved.
Height 1 foot to 20 inches. The strain was Commended
September 6, 1888.
11. Pwony-flowered Globe or Uhland (Dobbie).—A very
handsome free-flowering group. The incurved flowers are large
and very showy. Height 9 inches to 1 foot. The strain was
Highly Commended September 6, 1888.
12, Pwony-flowered or Incurved (Dobbie).—A magnificent
strain. Plants of bushy habit; very free flowering; flowers very
large ; colours rich and varied. Height 20 inches to 2 feet.
13. Dwarf Peony-flowered (Dobbie).—Plants of branching
habit; free flowering; flowers large, richly coloured. Height
6 inches to 9 inches.
14. Quilled (Dobbie).—-A very useful and showy group.
Flowers large, globular, drooping, guard petals flat and broad,
the centres well quilled. Height 18 inches to 2 feet.
15. Double Dwarf (Dobbie).—Plants of bushy habit; free
flowering. Height 16 inches.
16. Dwarf Bouquet-flowered (Dobbie).—Plants of compact
habit ; flowers small, very showy. Height 6 inches to 9 inches.
The strain was Highly Commended September 5, 1889.
17. Dwarf Pyramidal Bouquet (Dobbie).—A very beautiful
eroup. Plants of good habit; very free flowering. Height
9 inches to 1 foot. The strain was Highly Commended
September 5, 1889.
18. Dwarf Cocardeau or Crown (Dobbie).—A distinct group of
moderate growth. Flowers large, with white centres. Height
ANNUAL FLOWERS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 801
9 inches. The strain was Highly Commended September 6,
1888.
19. Tall Cocardeau or Crown (Dobbie).—Similar to the last,
but taller. Height 15 inches to 22 inches.
20. Ball or Jewel (Dobbie, Heinemann).—The distinct ball-
shaped flowers are of medium size and perfect shape. Very use-
ful. Height 1 foot to 15 inches. Ball or Jewel Scarlet, x x x
September 5, 1889. Very free flowering.
21. Imbricated Pompon (Dobbie).—Plants of erect pyra-
midal habit; flowers small, borne very freely on long stems.
Height 16 inches to 20 inches. Rose, x x x September 8,
1897.
22. Imbricated or Pompon Crown (Dobbie).—Flowers small
white centres. Height 15 inches to 20 inches. Rose, x x x
September 8, 1897. Flowers borne on long stems.
23. Queen of the Earlies (Dobbie, Vilmorin).—Plants of free
spreading habit; flowers large, flat, richly coloured. Height
10 inches to 15 inches. Very early blooming.
24. Shakespeare (Dobbie).—Plants of compact habit ; flowers
small, quilled. Height 4 inches to 6 inches.
25. Lady in White (Dobbie).—A very distinct and handsome
free-flowering variety, with large, pure white flowers. Height
1 foot. Highly Commended September 19, 1895.
26. Japanese mixed (Vilmorin).—A somewhat poor selection.
Height 15 inches.
CANDYTUFT.
27. Carmine (Watkins & Simpson).—Plants of straggling
habit; leaves light green, lanceolate ; very free flowering ; flowers
large, rich carmine.
28. Carter’s Spiral (Carter).—Height 1 foot ; very free flower-
ing; flowers large white. A fine variety.
29. Crimson Purple (Carter)—Height 10 inches ; lax habit ;
flowers of medium size, colour purple.
30. Dwarf Hybrids (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 6 inches
to 1 foot; flowers large, of rich and varied colours.
31. Old Variety (Carter)——Plants of loose growth; free
flowering ; flowers mauve, running to a lighter shade with age.
32. Tom Thumb (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 6 inches;
very free flowering ; flowers small, white, yellow centre.
802 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
82a. White (Carter)—Height 10 inches; good habit; free
flowering ; flowers white.
33. White Spiral (Carter).—Similar to No. 28. ;
84. White Rocket Empress (Watkins & Simpson). —Height
1 foot, of even regular growth; very free flowering ;: flowers
large, white, yellow centre. Very fine. |
CALLIOPSIS.
85. Nigra nana, x x x August 19, 1897 (Watkins & Simp-
son).—Plant of bushy compact habit ; exceptionally free flower-
ing; flowers deep velvety crimson. Very effective for marginal
lines. A continuous bloomer.
CENTAUREA.
36. Marguerita (Yates, Veitch).—Height 2 feet; loose strag-
gling habit ; white flowers borne on long stems. |
37. Marguerita, Blue (Veitch).—Height 20 inches; flowers
pinkish blue.
CHRYSANTHEMUM CORONARIUM.
38. Double Lemon (Watkins & Simpson).—Heighi 18 inches ;
flowers small, semi-double, lemon yellow.
39. Double Sulphur (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 2 feet
6 inches; flowers sulphur yellow.
40. Double White (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 18 inches ;
flowers small, semi-double, cream white, yellow centre.
41. Double Yellow (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 2 feet;
flowers small, semi-double, deep golden yellow.
CLARKIA.
42. Elegans (Veitch).—Height 2 feet ; moderately free flower- —
ing; flowers lilac-rose.
48. Elegans rosea fl. pl. (Veitch).—Height 2 feet ; free flower-
ing; flowers semi-double, soft salmon rose.
44, Integripetala (Veitch, Carter)—Height 18 inches ; sturdy
habit ; free flowering; flowers rosy purple.
45. Integripetala alba (Veitch)—Height 14 inches; bushy
habit ; flowers white.
46. Mrs. Langtry (Carter).—Height 9 inches; free flowering; _
flowers rosy purple, margined with blush white.
ANNUAL FLOWERS GROWN-AT CHISWICK, 1897. 803
47. Pulchella (Carter)—Height 1 foot; good habit; free
flowering ; flowers lilac purple.
48. Pulchella alba (Veitch)—Height 1 foot; flowers small,
white.
49, Pulchella alba fl. pl. (Veitch).—-Height 14 inches ; flowers
blush white.
50. Pulchella, Double Crimson (Watkins & Simpson).—Height
18 inches. Stock mixed.
51. Pulchella, Double Purple (Watkins & Simpson).—Height
10 inches; flowers bright purple. Very distinct.
52. Pulchella fl. pl. (Veitch)—Height 12 inches ; moderately
free flowering; flowers semi-double, deep rose shaded with
violet.
58. Pulchella marginata fl. pl. (Veitch).—Height 1 foot;
flowers rose, deeply margined with white.
54, Pulchella, Tom Thumb, double white (Watkins & Simp-
son).—Height 8 inches; compact habit; very free flowering ;
flowers double, blush white.
DIANTHUS CHINENSIS.
55. Heddewegii (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; compact habit ;
flowers large and handsome.
56. Heddewegii fil. pl., Salmon Queen (Veitch).—Height 8
inches. Stock mixed.
57. Heddewegii, Crimson Belle (Watkins & Simpson).—
Height 1 foot; bushy, compact habit; very free flowering ;
flowers large, and of much substance; crimson, maroon centre.
Very fine.
58. Heddewegii Diadematis fl. pl. (Veitch).—Height 6
inches to 8 inches; compact habit; free flowering; flowers
double.
59. Heddewegii, The Bride (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; bushy
compact habit ; very free flowering ; flowers large, white, purple
centre.
60. Laciniatus (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; flowers large and
handsome.
61. Laciniatus flore pleno (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; free
flowering ; flowers of medium size.
304 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
ESCHSCHOLTZIA.
62. Mandarin, x x x July 18, 1889 (Watkins & Simp-
son).—Height 1 foot; foliage beautifully cut and of a soft
glaucous hue; flowers canary yellow, centre deeper yellow. Very
effective.
63. Maritima (Carter)—Height 10 inches; bushy habit
foliage blue grey; flowers yellow, centre deep orange.
GODETIAS.
64. Bridesmaid (Veitch).—Height 2 feet ; sturdy habit; very
free flowering ; flowers blush and rose, lighter centre, the centre
of each petal striped with white.
65. Butterfly (Veitch)—Height 1 foot; compact habit ; free
flowering ; flowers large, rosy purple, white centre.
66. Duchess of Albany (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; lax habit;
flowers large, borne in clusters, white, shaded with pink.
67. Duchess of Albany compacta (Watkins & Simpson).—
A dwarf free-flowering form of No. 66.
68. Lady Albemarle (Veitch)—Height 1 foot; compact
habit ; exceptionally free flowering; flowers rose, shaded with
purple.
69. Lady, Satin Rose (Carter).—Height 9 inches; bushy
habit ; free flowering; flowers bright rose, lighter centre.
70. Lady, Satin Rose, Improved (Watkins & Simpson).—
Height 6 inches; bushy habit; free flowering ; flowers rich rose,
white centre. Very fine.
71. La Belle (Veitch).—Similar to No. 65.
72. Rosea alba (Carter, Veitch).—Height 16 inches; good
habit ; flowers blush white, deep rose centre.
73. Princess of Wales (Carter).—Height 10 inches; rather
loose habit; moderately free flowering; flowers bright rose,
changing to light purple.
74. The Bride (Veitch).—Height 16 inches; slender habit ;
flowers small, blush white, rose centre. |
75. Whitneyi (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; good habit; free
flowering ; flowers blush, varying to red.
HAWKWEED.
76. Red (Veitch).—Height 16 inches; compact, bushy habit;
flowers borne on long stems, colour pink.
i
ANNUAL FLOWERS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 805
77. White (Veitch)—Height 1 foot; compact habit; free
flowering ; flowers blush white.
78. Yellow, x x x July 18, 1889 (Veitch)—Height 18
inches; straggling habit; flowers soft yellow. Very effective.
A continuous bloomer.
LEPTOSIPHON.
79. Aureus (Veitch).—Height 4 inches; very compact habit ;
flowers small, yellow, deeper centre.
80. Densiflorus (Veitch)—Height 18 inches; very free
flowering ; flowers borne in clusters ; colour mauve.
81. Hybridus (Veitch).—Height 6 inches. A very good
strain. Flowers yellow, white, rose, pink, scarlet, &c.
82. Densiflorus albus (Veitch).—Height 10 inches; flowers
white.
83. Roseus, x x x July 18, 1889 (Veitch)—Height 6
inches; flowers small; colour rosy pink.
The Leptosiphons are admirably adapted for planting on
rockeries or dry banks.
LOVE-LIES-BLEEDING.
84. Love-lies-bleeding (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 3 feet
9 inches ; vigorous grower, carrying long drooping racemes of
deep crimson flowers.
MATRICARIA.
85. Golden Ball, A.M. September 17, 1897 (Carter).— Height,
1 foot; bushy, compact, pyramidal habit; flowers small, borne
very freely at the points of the growths; colour golden yellow.
A profuse and continuous bloomer.
MARIGOLDS.
86. African Lemon, x x September 8, 1897 (Watkins &
Simpson).—Height 2 feet; free flowering; flowers double, of
medium size, canary yellow. A very good strain.
87. African Orange, x x September 8, 1897 (Watkins &
Simpson).—Height 2 feet; very free flowering; flowers double,
rich canary yellow.
88. Dwarf African Lemon (Veitch).—A dwarf form of No. 86.
89. Dwarf African Orange (Veitch).—A very good dwarf form
of No. 87, but a week later in coming into flower.
i
806 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. : z
90. Pigmy Golden (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 6 inches H
spreading habit; very free flowering; flowers of good form,
double, rich orange.
91. Pigmy Spotted (Watkins & Simpson). see 6 inches ;
bushy spreading habit; free flowering ; flowers yellow, spotted
with crimson. sy
92. Tall French, Scotch Prize (Watkins & Simpson).—Height
2 feet; free flowering; flowers large, full, yellow, striped and
blotched with crimson. |
93. Yates’ Blotched and Tipped (Yates).—Height 18 inches;
bushy habit; free flowering; flowers yellow, blotched and tipped
with red.
See also Tagetes, 130, 181.
MIGNONETTE.
94. Crimson Victoria (Carter).— Plants of robust, free
branching habit; very free flowering; flowers brownish crimson.
95. Golden Gem (Carter).—Plants of vigorous, sturdy, pyra-
midal habit; flowers golden yellow, very fragrant.
96. Golden Machet (Yates).—Plants of compact, bushy habit,
with massive spikes of deep golden yellow flowers. A very fine
variety.
97. Giant Machet, Salmon Red (Watkins & Simpson).—
Plants of vigorous habit, with broad deep green leaves and stout
compact spikes of salmon red flowers.
98. Giant Machet (Watkins & Simpson).—Plants of dwarf
habit ; the buff-coloured flowers are borne on stout spikes.
99. Perfection (Carter).—Plants of good habit; flowers red,
borne on small spikes.
NASTURTIUMS.
100. Empress of India (Veitch).—Height 10 inches; very
bushy habit ; very free flowering; flowers large crimson, upper
petals striped with maroon. A continuous bloomer.
101. King of Tom Thumb (Veitch).—Height 9 inches ; com-
pact, bushy habit ; flowers thrown well above the foliage ; colour
rich scarlet. Very fine.
102. King of Tom Thumb, Scarlet (Carter).—Height 6 inches
to 9 inches; bushy compact habit; flowers large, scarlet, upper
petals streaked with crimson. .
ANNUAL FLOWERS GROWN AT CHISWICK, 1897. 3807
108. Tom Thumb Cloth of Gold (Veitch)—Height 1 foot ;
bushy, compact habit ; foliage pale green; moderately free
flowering ; flowers large, bright orange.
104. Tom Thumb Crimson (Veitch).—Height 10 inches;
moderately free bloomer ; flowers rich crimson.
105. Tom Thumb Pearl (Veitch).—Stock not fixed.
106. Tom Thumb King Theodore (Veitch).— Height 9 inches ;
very bushy habit; free flowering; flowers rich crimson, striped
with maroon. Very. fine.
107. Tom Thumb Ruby King (Veitch).—Height 10 inches ;
bushy habit ; flowers borne well above the foliage ; colour ruby
red.
108. Tom Thumb Yellow (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; bushy
habit ; exceptionally free flowering; flowers borne well above
the foliage; colour deep yellow.
PAPAVERS (Poppies).
109. Cardinal fl. pl. (Veitch and Watkins & Simpson).—Height
18 inches; foliage dark green, and deeply cut; flowers large,
double, bright scarlet. A continuous bloomer.
110. Danebrog, x x x July 18, 1889 (Veitch).—Height
18 inches to 2 feet; flowers large, bright scarlet, blotched with
silvery white.
111. Glaucum (Carter).—Height 1 foot to 15 inches; foliage
bluish green; free flowering; flowers clear crimson. Very
showy.
112. Umbrosum, x x x July 18, 1889 (Carter).—Height
1 foot; flowers large, crimson rose, spotted with dark brown.
118. Carnation-flowered (Veitch).—Height 25 feet to 3 feet ;
flowers fringed, colours various. A fine strain.
114, Dwarf French Mixed (Veitch).—Height 14 inches ;
flowers large, comprising many shades of pink, scarlet, and
crimson. |
115. Pxony-flowered Mixed ( Veitch).—Height 2} feet; flowers
double, colours various. A good selection.
116. Shirley Hybrids, Extra Selected (Veitch).— Height 1} feet.
A capital selection of a very fine strain. Flowers large, colours
_ varying from white, through many shades of pink and scarlet, to
_ deep crimson.
3808 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
117. The Bride (Veitch).—Height 2 feet 6 inches; flowers
large, pure white. A grand variety. a
118. The Mikado (Veitch).—Height 2 feet ; flowers fringed,
snow white edged with crimson. .
119. The New Picotee (Carter).—Height 14 feet; sturdy
habit; very free flowering; fiowers single and semi-double; 3 |
colours rich and varied.
120. White Swan (Veitch)—Height 18 inches; foliage —
glaucous green, deeply cut; flowers double white.
121. Yates’ Avalanche (Yates)—Height 2 feet; flowers
fringed, large white. Selected from Snowdrop.
SALPIGLOSSIS.
122. Salpiglossis (Veitch).—Height 1 foot to 18 inches. The —
large richly coloured flowers are borne with great freedom. A
magnificent strain. Colours various.
ScHIZANTHUS.
123. Papilionaceus pyramidalis (Veitch)—Height 1 foot;
bushy habit; very free flowering; flowers lilac blue, central
portion yellow, spotted and striped with dark brown.
124. Pinnatus (Veitch).—Height 2 feet; flowers mauve and
white.
125. Pyramidalis oculatus (Veitch).—Height 1 foot; very
free flowering ; flowers large, purple, lip white, blotched with —
dark brown.
126. Retusus (Veitch).—Height 1 foot ; bushy habit; rather —
shy bloomer; flowers rose pink; upper petal orange yellow
streaked with brown and tipped with deep rose.
127. Retusus albus (Veitch).—Height 15 inches; flowers
white, upper petal orange yellow.
128. Retusus Grahami (Veitch).—A vigorous, free-flowering
form of No. 126.
129. Sweet Sultan, new deep purple (Yates).—Height 2 feet ;
vigorous grower; very profuse bloomer ; flowers rich purple.
TAGETES,
130. Légion d’Honneur, x x x September 19, 1895 (Carter).—
Height 6 inches; bushy habit; exceptionally free flowering ;
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE. 809
flowers deep canary yellow, lower portion of petals deep crimson
maroon. A continuous bloomer.
131. Signata pumila (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 7 inches;
very bushy spreading habit; flowers golden yellow, blotched with
orange.
TROPZOLUM.
132. Lobbianum fulgens (Watkins & Simpson).—Very
vigorous sturdy grower; branching habit; moderately free
flowering; flowers thrown well above the foliage, of medium
size, colour crimson.
183. Seedling, unnamed (Goody).—Trailing habit; foliage
pale green ; flowers buttercup yellow, with serrated petals.
VISCARIA.
134. Cardinalis fulgens (Watkins & Simpson).—Height 1 foot;
bushy compact habit; very free flowering; flowers rich crimson.
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE.
1. The Council of the Royal Horticultural Society, sympathis-
ing with the efforts of various County Councils, technical insti-
tutes, schools, gardeners’ mutual improvement societies, and
other bodies to promote instruction in practical horticulture by
means of lectures, demonstrations, &c., and in the hope of
rendering such teaching more definite and effective, have con-
sented to hold an examination in horticulture on Tuesday,
April 5, 1898.
2. The following is an outline syllabus, showing the nature of
the subjects to which it is considered desirable that the attention
of students should be drawn.
ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES.
On which Horticultural practice is based.
(1) Soils, good and bad: their Nature and Composition: Weeds and their
eradication. ~
(2) Requirements of Growth—Water, Heat, Air.
(3) Seeds: Nature of, Duration of Vitality in, and Modes of Germination.
(4) Roots: Nature and functions of; Fibrils and Root-Hairs ; what they
do, and how they do it—what Helps and what Hinders them.
(5) Stems and Branches: their Nature, Work, and uses; Helps and
Hindrances to their work.
310 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
(6) Leaves: what they are, what they do; Helps and Hindrances to the
rk
work.
(7) Tubers and Bulbs, Leaf-Buds and Flower Buds. "
(8) Growth and development: increase in size and changes of Composition _
and Structure ; Formation and Storage of Food Materials. a
(9) Flowers: their Component Parts ; what they do; Artificial Fertilisation. =
(10) Fruit: Changes and Dey elopment during ripening; Forms and —
Varieties, as, e.g., Apple, Strawberry, Plum, &c.
(11) Seed: Formation of.
(12) Variation and Selection.
(13) Names and Orders of common Garden-Plants, Trees, &c.
HORTICULTURAL OPERATIONS AND PRACTICE.
(1) Surveying and Landscape Gardening : Elements of.
(2) Choice of Site for Garden.
(3) Description and use of implements under each head. |
(4) Operations connected with the Cultivation of the Land, with explana-
tions and illustrations of good and bad methods: Digging and
Trenching; Draining; Hoeing, Stirring the Soil, and Weeding ;
Watering; Preparation of Seed Beds; Rolling and Raking, Sowing,
Transplanting and thinning; Potting, Planting: Aspects, Positions
and Shelter; Staking; Earthing and Blanching, &c.
(5) Propagation. Elementary principles: Cuttings, Budding and Grafting,
Stocks used, Layering, Division, Branch Pruning, Root Pruning;
Old and Young Trees and Bushes. Training.
(6) Fruit Culture: Open Air and Under Glass; Small Fruits; Apples and
Pears; Stone Fruits; Gathering and Storing; Packing and
Marketing. General Knowledge of Fruits, and Selection of
Varieties.
(7) Vegetable Culture: Tubers and Roots; Green Vegetables: Fruits and
Seeds ; Rotation of Crops, and Selection of Varieties.
(8) Flower Culture, Outside and Under Glass.
(9) Manures and their Application.
(10) Improvement of Plants by Cross-breeding, Hybridisation and Selection.
(11) Arboriculture: Trees and Shrubs and their Culture.
(12) Insect and Fungus Pests: Prevention and Treatment.
3. Students and young gardeners not having had the advan-
tage of attending lectures, but wishing to present themselves at
some one of the centres for examination, might with advantage
consult some of the following works: ‘Primer of Botany”
(Macmillan & Co.), by Sir J. D. Hooker, K.C.S.1; “ Botany for
Beginners” and “ Plant Life’? (Bradbury, Agnew & Co.), by
M. T. Masters, M.D., F.R.S.; ‘‘ Popular Gardening,” 4 vols.
(Cassell & Co.), edited by T. D. Fish; ‘‘ Epitome of Gardening ”
(Adam Black & Co.), by T. Moore and M. T. Masters ;
“‘ Agriculture,” parts i. & ii. (John Murray), by W. Fream, LL.D. ;
“Prize Essay on Fruit Culture,” by J. Wright; ‘‘ Physiology of
Plants,” by Professor Sorauer (Longmans, Green & Co.) ;
“ Structural Botany,’ by Dr. D. H. Scott (Adam Black & Co.) ;
“Natural History of Plants,’ by Keyner & Oliver (Blackie & Son).
EXAMINATION IN HORTICULTURE. 811
4, The examination will be held simultaneously in ag many
different centres in Great Britain and Ireland as circumstances
may demand.
5. The examination will for the most part be based on the
above outline syllabus of ‘“‘ Elementary Principles of Horticul-
tural Operations and Practice,” but arrangements will be made,
as far as possible, to frame the questions so as to. cover the
eround of any syllabus sent up for that purpose. It will, how-
ever, in all cases, be absolutely essential for students to exhibit
a sufficient knowledge of the ‘“ Elementary Principles ’’ named
in the above syllabus.
6. 800 marks will be given as a maximum. Candidates
gaining 200 marks and over will be placed in the first class.
Those gaining 150 to 200 will be placed in the second class,
and those gaining between 100 and 150 will be placed in the
third class. Candidates failing to obtain 100 marks will not be
classed.
7. The Royal Horticultural Society will award a Silver Gilt
Medal to the candidate gaining the highest number of marks, and
will also, if the County Council or other body promoting the
lectures wish it, deliver to their candidates certificates of the class
in which they shall have passed.
8. County Councils, lecturers, &c., must send in to the Society
the actual number of candidates at each proposed centre at least
ten days before the examination takes place.
9. Gardeners and students wishing to sit for the examina-
tion, but who have not attended any particular series of lectures,
must send in their name and address, and also the name and
address of some responsible person willing to conduct the
examination (sce par. 14), to the Secretary, R.H.S., 117 Victoria
Street, Westminster, at least three weeks before the date of
examination.
10. A small capitation fee of 3s. will be charged for every
student, in order to partially defray the expenses of the
examination. :
11. County Councils, lecturers, and others desiring to have
an examination held in their neighbourhood, must also send in
the fult name and address (with designation or occupation) of
one responsible person for each proposed centre, who will under-
take to supervise the examination in accordance with the Society’s
rules.
312 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
12. N.B.—The Society is willing to hold an examination
wherever a magistrate, clergyman, schoolmaster, or other —
responsible person accustomed to examinations will consent to ©
supervise one on the Society’s behalf, and in accordance with the
rules laid down for its conduct.
13. A stamped and directed envelope must be enclosed with
all communications requiring a reply.
SCHOLARSHIPS.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., President of the Society and
Past Master of the Worshipful Company of Gardeners, very —
kindly offered a scholarship of £25 a year for two years, to be |
awarded, after the examination of the Royal Horticultural Society
in 1895, to the student who should pass highest, if he were
willing to accept the conditions attaching thereto. The main
outline of these conditions is that the holder must be between the
ages of eighteen and twenty-two years, and that he will study |
gardening for one year at least at the Royal Horticultural
Society’s Gardens at Chiswick, conforming to the general rules
laid down there for students. In the second year of the scholar-
ship he may, if he likes, continue his studies at some other place
at home or abroad which shall be approved by the Master of the
Worshipful Company of Gardeners and by the Council of the
Royal Horticultural Society.
A similar scholarship was presented by Baron Schréder,
V.M.H., after the 1896 examination.
Another was given after the 1897 examination by N. N. —
Sherwood, Esq., V.M.H., Master of the Worshipful Company of
Gardeners.
Another similar scholarship has been kindly promised for
1898-9 by G. W. Burrows, Esq., a member of the Court of the
same Worshipful Company of Gardeners.
And yet another is promised for 1899-1900 by the Right Hon.
the Lord Amherst.
If the student who is at the head of the examination is for
any reason unable or unwilling to accept the scholarship, it is
then offered to the next highest on the list, and so on throughout
the first class.
JOURNAL
OF THE
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Vou. XXI. 1898.
Part III.
FOURTH ANNUAL EXHIBITION OF BRITISH-
GROWN FRUIT.
HELD AT THE CrysTAL PALACE, SEPTEMBER 30,
OcTOBER 1 AND 2, 1897.
Havine in mind the exceedingly bad blooming time for all hardy
fruits in the spring of 1897 everyone anticipated a very small
and inferior Show. In both respects the anticipations proved
false. The Show was larger than its predecessors (save 1895, the
year of the wonderful Apple crop), and the size and quality of
the fruit were marvellous. Never has British-grown fruit shown
more clearly its pre-eminence in magnificent quality than it did
in this year of a most unfavourable spring; and if the Show
demonstrated one thing more than another, it was that British-
grown fruit need fear no competition, in its season, when grown
with skill and attention.
In their Annual Report the Council of the Society draw
attention to the fact that the continuance of this particular Show
from year to year rests entirely with those interested in British
fruit production, for unless at least £100 is annually subscribed
towards the Prize List the Show must be dropped. The expenses
of such a Show are unavoidably great, and the Society has no
B
314 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
means whatever of recouping itself for the outlay. It cannot,
therefore, be too strongly insisted that those who take
interest in the Show and in the welfare of British fruit-grow
must help bear the burden by subscribing at least £100 towa
the prizes. The addition of new classes is always being urged
on the Council; next year (1898) a new Division for market
growers is called for, all which makes it only the more
necessary that those who are interested in the subject, whether
Fellows or not, should join with the Council in providing the —
necessary financial support for the Show. Subscriptions should —
be sent at once for the 1898 Show to the Secretary, R.H.S. Office,
117 Victoria Street, Westminster. The following is the |
LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE PRIZE FUND, 1897.
-
Balderson, H., Corner Hall, Hemel Hempstead
Basham, J., Bassaleg ;
Brodie of Brodie, Jan, Brodie Castle, N. B.
Browne, Colvile, Hextable, Swanley.
Bunyard & Co., George, The Royal Nurseries, Maidstone
Bythway, Major, Warborough, Llanelly
Chester Paxton Society, Grosvenor Museum, Chester
Cole, S., Althorpe Gardens, Northampton
Colman, J., Gatton Park, Reigate : ‘ ; ,
Cotterell, W., Oxon Hoath, Tonbridge . : é
Day, Jas., Gallow ay House Gardens, Garliestown. N.B.
Digby, J. x: Wingfield, Sherborne Castle, Dorset
Douglas, James, Edenside, Great Bookham, Surrey
Dunn, Malcolm, Dalkeith Palace Gardens, N.B. .
Edwards, R., Beechey Lees, Sevenoaks 5
Empson, W. J., Ampthill House Gardens, Beds
Fennell, Geo., Fairlawn Gardens, Tonbridge
Harris, F., Eastnor Gardens, Ledbury .
Haywood, T. B., Woodhatch, Reigate .
Hill, D., Herga, Watford ; 3
Kay, Peter, Claigmar, Finchley
Kemp, A., Coolhurst Gardens, Fordham
Laing & Sons, J., Forest Hill, S.E.
Low & Co., H., Upper Clapton, E. :
McIndoe, 5 Hutton Hall ane Guisborough
McKenzie, a Linton :
Merryweatber, H., Southw ell
Nicholson, J., Sewardstone Lodge Gardens, Chingford .
Pearson & Sons, J. R., Chilwell, Notts ‘
Peed & Sons, J., Roupell Park Nurseries, West Norw ood Ss. E.
Perkins & Sons, T., Northampton ‘ :
Rivers & Son, T., Saw bridgeworth, Herts
Ross, C., Welford Park Gardens, Newbury .
Rothschild, Leopold de, New Court, St. Swithin’ s ‘Lane, E. C.
Sanders, R. C., Halton Gardens, Tring
Schroder, Baron, The Dell, Staines
Sherwood, N., Streatham
ft
or
io
ow
=
COUN FOUMNOHRERS
ROOK OUVNFNAOSSCHNNORFPONSOOCOCONHEFHOONOHHOCONOHUE
—"
_
a
_
pt
_
FPOOCOwWOUrFNKNUNOoOCONNWUF ONAN
een
* ;
FOURTH ANNUAL EXHIBITION OF BRITISH-GROWN FRUIT. $315
°
; 4
Sle og, rove, William, Gatton, Reigate .
m mith, Martin R., Warren House, — Kent’
b, R., Shrewsbury . :
0
8 1
‘Spooner & Sons, S., Hounslow 1
Sutton & Sons, Reading : ‘ 5
Sydenham, R., Tenby Street, Birmingham : 1
“Tidy, W., Stanmore Hall Gardens, Middlesex 0
Turton, T., Maiden Erlegh, Reading . < i : ; ie,
Veitch, Harry J., Redcliffe Gardens, S.W. . Ct
ote
1
1
5)
0
1
£
1
1
—
HKOme DO”
ORFF OOCORFRrFOOO
‘Veitch’ & Sons, J., Royal Exotic Nurseries, Chelsea
Veitch & Sons, R., Royal Nurseries, Exeter .
Walker, J., Ham Common, Surrey
“Wastenobie, Market Harborough .
Wells, B., Crawley ‘
Wheeler & Son, J. C., Kingsholm Nursery, 6 Gloucester
Wingfield, A. H., Ampthill . :
_ Wingfield, Mrs., "Ampthill House, Beds
Woodward, Geo., Barham Court Gardens, Teston, Maidstone
The following table may be interesting as comparing the
number of dishes of each fruit exhibited in each of the four years
during which the Show has been held. Only the exhibits under
the Schedule have been included, it having been found impossible
to enumerate everything shown in classes not for competition.
—_
— hh
Dishes of 1894 | 1895 1896 | 1897
ake wets fd ae
1,027 1,938 1,083 | 1,485
Apricots 2 1 By ss 1
Bananas - 1 — —
Bullaces 5 3 1 3
Cherries 7 12 6 | 1
-Damsons 6 18 4 5
Figs . 4 9 4 26
Gooseberries 1 — — —
Grapes 105 97 135 120
-Medilars — 2 3 5
Melons — 10 7 8
Nectarines 15 18 ro 11
Nuts... eae 26 | 19, -| 10
Passiflora . | — —— 1 1
Peaches / 51 80 24 77
Pes P A : - | 829 779 795 677
Fines A ; : - | = —" 5 3
eee. ~. ..|- 90 101 38 115
es . . ll 6 14 17 1
fomatos . : - » — 67 2 3
- | /
7. )6=6.Cté‘“C;ti*L:SC*«i AG 3,176 | 2,152 | 2,552
ee epee Seem SS
Entries for competition .| 1,301 1,783 1,234 | 1,329
Wisitos - . . ./| 23,680 | 36,293 | 26,499 | 27,242
Be
816 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. *
For the following table we are indebted to the kindness of |
the Editor of the Gardeners’ Magazine :—
APPLES.
_
oo
wo
a
i
ra
mR
8
on
-
Varieties 1897 1896 1895 Varieties
Ribston Pippin... 73 ... 61 ...111 | Tyler’s Kernel ... ...
Cox’s Orange... ... 66... 75 ...122 | Claygate Pearmain ...
Warner’s King... 56... 41 ... 72 | Devonshire Quarren-
mo oO
. tae
_
King of the Pippins 52 ... 45 ... 98 den ... » Loge
Blenheim Orange ... 43 ... 28 .. 32 Hollandbury ; 6.200
Worcester Pearmain 42 ... 31 ... 49 | Lady Sudeley . 2 3 ae
Peasgood’s Nonesuch 39 ... 33 ... 79 | Mannington Pearmain . 6.408
Cox’s Pomona ... 38... 27 ... 53 | Striped Beefing ... .>) Bao
Lord Derby ... ... 34... 27 ... 61 Yorkshire Beauty » bot
Bramley’s Seedling 33 ... 17 ... 26 Grenadier ... « Bice
Lane’s Prince Albert 32 ... 33 ... 37 | Waltham Abbey § Seed-
Keklinville ... ... 30... 12... 33 Ling 4.30) ia os, & ons gee
Emperor Alexander 27 ... 34 ... 51 Belle Dubois . 0... Tae
The.Queen ... ... 27 ... 20... 49 | Crimson Quoining 0 ae
Dumelow’s Seedling 25 ... 18 ... 29 | Egremont Russet oe ee
Lord Suffield ... ... 25 ... 15 ... 53 | Gravenstein ‘tas (Ree « 4 oon ae
Cellini i. 4... 2. BS... BEE 344 Bawthorndan 2. 3
Baumann’s Reinette 22 ... 18 ... 17| Kentish Fillbasket 0
Beauty of Kent ... 22... 8 ... 14 | Mabbot’s Pearmain ... 3
Gascoyne’s Scarlet... 22 ... 16 ... 28 | New Northern Green-
Potts’ Seedling... 22 ....14 ... 34 MAG cn. busi) cece
Bismarck... . 21 ... 22 .., 36 | Reinette de Canada...
Loddington or Stone’ 521 <0 Se a ee
Fearn’s Pippin... .20 :.. 17... 49
Golden Noble... ... 20... 19... 29
Mére de Menage ... 20... 21... 13
Stirling Castle ... 20... 12... 38
Royal Jubilee
Allington Pippin
Autumn Pearmain
Duchess’ Favourite ...
Duchess of Gloucester
Alfriston... ... ... 19 ... 15 ... 22 | Hormead Pearmain ...
American Mother . AD 2. 27 5: 25) Manks Godino
Tower of Glamis ... 18 ... 12 ... 27 | Wadhurst Pippin
Court Pendu Plat ... 16 ... 12 ... 4} Allen’s Everlasting, .
i
owws)
bo OO OF Ge OO Co WH OO UO OO Wo OO GO CO Oo OO GO C2 OD He He HE eR HB Or Or O18 Or Or Or Ot Ot Ot Or ANNAN ~1@
HK WE WNOORDSOWNDOHOHNOR PEE WRHORkKH OUMNH COO
0
. 8
-
=
: =
a
a
Margil ... ... ... 16... 13 ... 19 | Barnack Beauty... Roe
Sandringham... ... 16... 12... 5/| Calville pies Pré- ‘
Spencer’s Favourite 14... 2... 17 coce ... ‘ sente
Washington °...°, ... 145,. 23... 31 | Domimneg; >: oe
Lady Henniker ... 13... 5 ... 20 | Gold Medal : ae
Frogmore Prolific... 11 ... 4... 10) | Hanwell colcsral . 1
Wealthy .. . 11... 4... 8) Hoary Morning .. : ge
Duchess of Olden- | Kentish Pippin .. . ae
burg ... ... «10... 2... 10| Kerry Pippin ° oan
bora Grosvenor... 10 6c Bim. ES | Keswick Codlin . : ee
New Hawthornden 10 ... 11 ... 34 Mrs. Barron “ ; os
Newton Wonder ... 10 ... 12 ... 16 | Red Ribbed Greening , ae
Brownlees’ Russet 9... 7... 3)| Rosemary Russet . 3 . oe
Golden Spire... ... 9... 10... 8} RoundWinterNonesuch3 ... 0... 4_
Adams’ Pearmain... 8... 4... 18 | Royal Russet : + ae
Annie Elizabeth 8... 6... 11 | Searlet Pearmain ; oo ae
Gloria Mundi... ... 8... 14... 13 | Twenty-Ounce ... : oo
Jefferson’s eT 4... 6 | Vicar of Beighton 1 oa.) pe
King of Tomkins Yellow Ingestrie Bt er :
County... ... «. 8... 2.. 7 | Banks’ Exhibition
Varieties
Beauty of Hants mA
Bedfordshire Foundling
Belle de Pontoise
Betty Geeson
Braddick’s Nonpareil...
Calville Malingre
- Castle Major
Colonel Vaughan
Councillor ...
Donoughmore
Dutch Codlin
_ Dutch Mignonne
_ Foster’s Seedling
_ Greenup’s Pippin
me Hall Door ... ...
- Hambledon Deux Ans
Harvey’s Wilts Defiance
James Grieve :
_ Kilderkin
- Malster
— Miller’s Seedling
_ Munster Pippin .. :
_ Roundway Magnum Bo-
re
Seaton House
Scarlet Nonpareil
Scarlet Tiffin
_ Small’s Admirable
Stone Peach
4 Sturmer Pippin ..
Summer Costard
_ Tibbett’s Pearmain
Tom Putt
_ White Square
_ Winter Peach
: Beslawin :
Baxter’s Pearmain
_ Beauty of Bath .
_ Beauty of the Day
Mewess Pool ... .
Bietigheimer Red
Bowhill Pippin ...
Brabant Bellefieur
Bucombe Fairmaid ...
Bull’s Golden Reinette
Calville Blanche
Catshead
_Chateley’s Kernel
Christmas Pearmain..
Cockle’s Pippin ...
Cornish Aromatic
Cornish Giant
Court of Wick
Dr. Harvey...
Z
7
Ly
Moor Park bs
¥.
Dis
1897
WNMWNWNWNWNWNHYMNNMNHWNWNNNNNNWNWNW NW b Ww
a .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . jee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . * .
SCFM OFWORREFRFOOFRRFWOCOCOOCOOCOROFWOrFRONOrHNSO COCOOCOCRFRRFRFOOCORFRFNOCOOUFRORF Oe >»
ln el Ol Ol oll ol OO Ol Ol ll oll wc)
hes
1896 1895
SOS O00 0.0 SO i ee Se eee
CONOR NOOCORFFOCOOWNUDOODCOFOCN RON OR HOH
Varieties
Duke of Devonshire ...
Emily Childs
ry il ge
Fairmaid of Taunton..
Farmer’s Seedling
Forge Apple
Flanders Pippin...
Flower of Kent ...
Galloway Pippin
| Gibbon’s Russet...
| Golden Ball
| Golden Reinette
| Golden Russet ...
Gospatrick ..
Graham ...
| Grand Duke Constan-
A ee
Green Costard ... ‘
_ Hambling’ s Seedling...
| Herefordshire Beefing
D Feeeloedahixs Codlin..
| Herefordshire Under-
leaf .
| Herefordshire Pearmain
Holland Apple
| Holland Pippin ...
Kirke’s Fame
Lewis’ Incomparable...
_London Pippin ...
McDonald ... -
Mrs. Phillimore ...
Murfitt’s Seedling
New White Moss
| Northern Phage
Old Quarrenden..
Paraquet ;
Pearce’s Seedling
Reinette Grise ..
Rivers’ Codlin ...
|Rymer_...
| St. Edmund’s: Pippin
Smart’s Prince Arthur
Sopsin Wine ..
Stoup Leadington
Tewkesbury Baron
Transparent de Cronsels
Wagener sear ke
White Apple
Winter Margil
Winter Quoining
Winter Ribston... ...
Williams’ Favourite ...
Wyken Pippen ... ...
| Yorkshire Greening ...
APRICOTS.
FOURTH ANNUAL EXHIBITION OF BRITISH-GROWN FRUIT.
=
ee el el ce oe ee
th
Pe ee Re ee pe ps
Dishes
1897 1896 1895
COOFrFOCOOFROCrFOrFOCOCCL
RPereOROROOCOCrFMCcCOoOCcCOCOCOeCoCoCoCOoOrFCOoOOoOrFCOCCOCO oor-orfe
fj
COCOFFOCOOFRONCrFOCOCON
PNOFWOSSFOHOCOFRCOCCOCOORFROCHOOOHOCCONO oor.
317
_
318
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
BULLACES.
Dishes Dishes
Varieties 1897 1896 1895 Varieties 1897 1896 1
Common Bullace Reco Waar 5 eye
CHERRIES.
Morello 1’...
Damsons.
Cheshire 1... 1... 21 Crittenden’s 1 .«. ‘Oe
Common Lk’ 4 UL oe “Eee 2 ... Lic
rane
Brown Turkey .,. ..¢ 34 ..14 .., Black Douro i 1
ESPACE ae see. ak oe nav wen ; Rond Noir ... ee
Negro Largo 3... 2... 1! White Ischia «= - oe
Reculvers ... ca dy Oem ee |
GRAPES. ;
Muscat of Alexandria 24 ...30 ...21 | Buckland Sweetwater 3... 3... 2
Alicante > ...24 ...17 |.Chasselas Napoleon... 3... 0... 2
Gros Maroc... ww 14 ..A@ 223 Gros Guillaunie..- 3... 142. ae
Black Hamburgh 11 ...12) 5 8 | Mars. Pearson: 3. 3 i
Geos Colmar 2 005) 9 id abe) Del ope 2... Oa
Madresfield Court 8 ...12 ... 5 | Golden Queen 2.2. Oe
Foster’s Seedling . ... 6... 7... 3 | Sweetwater... ... 2... aie
Mrs. Pince’s Bk.Muscat 5... 5... 4 | Black Morocco ... 1 «. Oe
Lady Downe’s ... 5 iva | Prebbiene wk 1 sO
Alnwick Seedling Bs MOUS 4
MEDLARS.
Dutch ... ee | ee | Nottingham Lice See
Common L568 at ROVE y.. 1.
MELONS.
Hero of Lockinge G5. 82.983) BestokaAiec, Li Sie
Seedling oa: 2... 1....0] La Favorite Lo Ree
Eastnor Castle ... 1... 0... 0 | Scarlet Model lL eee
NECTARINES.
Pineapple 4 fen Ose, P| SIC ee 1 oe
Victoria 3. us Liss DY Beince ot Wales..- re
Albert Victor 7 een | Une res, |
Nots.
Cobnuts Te Pe Filberts Dini eae
Walnuts hea: Ghee i | Hazel ... 1 3 ee
Passion FLOWER.
Passiflora edulis... 1. isa eg
PRACHES.
Sea Eagle oe . 21... 6 ...17 | Barrington ... 2 05 Oren
Princess of Wales 9 ici, tom). Gladstone's. 2 «+-O ie
Walburton Admirable 7... 1 ...10 | Albatross ... re
Lady Palmerston 5 ... 3... 0 | Bellegarde ... 1. Chae
Late Admirable ... 6560 1-08) .Ghampion: a. 1... 0) eee
Golden Eagle 4... 0... 4 | Chancellor ... 1. ..ce O° of
Nectarine 4...2... 8 | Exquisite 1.3 sue
Salway... 4 ...1... 0 | Mrs. Sharpe 1 ...« 0 “tae
Lord Palmerston 3... 2... 5 | Royal George ‘ 1... Ose
Prince of Wales.. 3... 0... 7 | Stirling Castle ... 1 ... 0 sscmee
Marguerite Marillat ...
Nouvelle Fulvie...
Beurré Baltet Pére
Fondante de Thirriot
_ Princess
Beurré Sterckmans
Gratioli of Jersey
_ Grosse Calebasse
Nouveau Poiteau
Olivier de Serres...
Vicar of Winkfield
Bellisime d’Hiver
~ Beurré Dumont ...
p Smooth Cayenne
Coe’ 3 Golden ae
Monarch ...
-Pond’s Seedling...
Beurré de Capiaumont
COPE EER PER OLEOIAAAOONNADDOWOOSO
PNWOrFNOOON WARP OOH KE OOOH & ® bo
CWC COOCRNW WON NANO W Dh >
PEARS.
Dishes
Varieties 1897 1896 1895 Varieties
_ Pitmaston Duchesse... 46 ...55 ...69 ,) Chaumontel
Louise Bonne of Jersey 36 ...33 ...55 | Comte de Lamy...
- Doyenné du Comice ... 35 ...39 ...28 | Seckle . ss
Beurré Diel... Ate: OS 4.00 Triomphe de Jodoigne
_ Beurré Superfin... ... 31 ...24 ...16 | Beurré de Jonghe
Durondeau . ... 26 ...36 ...42 | Beurré Fouqueray
Marie Louise ... 23 ...40 ...54 | Beurré Jean Van Geert
Marie Louise d’Uccle... 20 ... 8 ...15 | Beurré Rance
Beurré Hardy ... 18 ...24 ...16 | Bishop’s Thumb
Duchesse d’Angouléme 18 ...28 ...17 | Duchesse de Bordeaux
_ Beurré Bachelier 17 ...14 ... 5 | Fondante de Cuerne...
Josephine de Malines... 17 ...20 .. 13 | Hacon’s Incomparable
Catillac j . 16 ..: 7 .,.15 | Huyshe’s Victoria
Doyenné Boussoch 15 ... 4 ...14 | Jargonelle ...
Glou Morceau 15 ...25 ...19 | King Edward
Beurré Bose Af Sn SI Napoleon
Winter Nelis 14 ...25 ...12 | President d’ Osmonv ille
Maréchal de Cour . 13 ...13 ...17 | Soldat Laboureur
Easter Beurré 11 ...20 ... 4 | Williams’ Bon Chrétien
Bergamotte d’Esperen 10 ...14 ... 1 | Althorpe Crassane
Fondante d’Automne... 10 ... 5 ...15 | Ambrosia : sf
Gansel’s Bergamot 10-293. 5.) .Automn Bergamotte .
General Todtleben ... 10... 9 ...14 | Autumn Nelis ...
Uvedale’s St. Germain 10 ...17 ...15 | Belle de Bruxelles
Beurré Clairgeau ..16,...10 | Beurré d’Anjou ...
Beurré d’Amanlis .. 1 ...14 | Beurré d’Aremberg
Souvenir du Congrés... ..12 ...29 | Beurré Goubalt ...
- Thompson’s 5 | Beurré Niger
me Conference... ... 5 | Comte de Flanders
_ Madame Treyve... ... 9 | Directeur Alphand
Brockworth Park ...12 | Directeur Hardy
Marie Benoist Dr. Joubert...
Brown Beurré oA ae Elton ..
_ Emile d’Heyst vay aoe | Fertility
| Flemish Beauty .. e
| Fondante de Gharheu
' Forelle...
Gros Colmar oy
Knight’s Monarch
Le Lectier ..,
Léon Leclere
Marie Lye Baltet
Nec Plus Meuris
Passe Colmar :
Triomphe de Vienne...
Van Mons. Léon Leclere
' Verulam
Zépherin Grégoire
PINEAPPLES.
Mees 2 a. 10, Queen: +.
PLUMS.
34 ...10 ...32 | Reine Claude de Bavay
9.:.. 6... 61’ Bryanston Gage..:
9... 1... 6 | Grand Duke
FOURTH ANNUAL EXHIBITION OF BRITISH-GROWN FRUIT.
_
io)
o
bo
bo Do DS bo Dw dw ww OD
bee RR 0 DD
e .
WWANIDWRHOTONOWOHHOHOHPWOOWMOHNOHONUWWOHNOWNOCODORWHHOEE,
oR:
319
saan
fore
©
on
CHWNNOSCCNKFOCONOCOUFROOCOFRNOOCOFOCOCCOCOCOOCOKH CH WwW HH rH OWFRWNOCORHKEO
L ve O 23:6
T o0 2a
Siitcc ey ee
5 OG. 6
820 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Piums—continued.
Dishes Dishes
Varieties 1897 1896 1895 Varieties 1897 1896 1895
Jefferson 4...3... 2 | Autumn Compote ... 1... Om
Guthrie’s Golden 3... 0... 2 | Belle de Septembre ... 1 ... 3°lgm
Magnum Bonum 3... 1 ... 4 | Blue Impératrice 1’... Oe
Victoria 3... 0... 1 | Cloth of Gold 1 ... 0 coe
Archduke ... ... ... 2... 0... 2 | Coe’s Violet ss 1 ... 0.
Brahy’s Green Gage... 2... 1... 1 | Count Althann’s Gage 1 ... Oe
Cox’s Emperor ... 2... 1... 2.| Goliath pak, ese 1 ... 0 ae
Late Transparent 2... 1 ... 0 | Golden Castle 1 ... Ocoee
Lawrence’s Favourite 2... 0... 1 | Impériale de Milan 1 ... 2 oe
Prince Engelbert 2) ne, OD wen et ee eo oe 1 ... 1 oe
Prince of Wales ... a ie O oc Ot Vee Purple Gage 1 ... Osan
Transparent Gage 2...0.. 2 | Le Mot Sang 1... Oe
Washington 2... 0... 0 | Purple Gage 1 ..0 eee
Wyedale D tae pie |
QUINCEs.
Pear-shaped see aap insa® awe. Seer ded OBon Gene sie pce’ # cee
TomatTos.
Conference ... ... ... 2... 1 .¥. 3| Laxton’s Open Air ... 1 20
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST.
Division I.
Fruits grown under Glass or otherwise.
Open to Gardeners and Amateurs only.
Nore.—Exhibitors could compete in one Class only of Classes 1, 2; and
of Classes 3, 4.
Class 1.—Collection of 12 dishes of Ripe Dessert Fruit :—
6 kinds at least; only 1 Pine, 1 Melon, 1 Black and 1 White
Grape, allowed; not more than 2 varieties of any other kind, and
no two dishes of the same variety.
First Prize, £7. 10s.; Second, £5; Third, £2. 10s.
1. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury (gr. F. Harris).
2. Earl of Harrington, Derby (gr. J. Goodacre).
3. Sir J. W. Pease, Bart., M.P., Guisboro’ (gr. J.
McIndoe, V.M.H.).
Class 2,—Collection of 8 dishes of Ripe Dessert Fruit :—
4 kinds at least; only 1 Melon, 1 Black and 1 White Grape,
allowed; not more than 2 varieties of any other kind, and no two
dishes of the same variety. Pines excluded.
First Prize, £5; Second, £3; Third, £2.
1. Messrs. de Rothschild, Acton (gr. G. Reynolds).
2. Mrs. Wingfield, Ampthill (gr. W. J. Empson).
8. W. K. D’Arcy, Esq., Stanmore (gr. W. Tidy).
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST.
321
Class 8.—Grapes, 6 distinct varieties; 2 bunches of each,
both Black and White must be represented.
First Prize, £5; Second, £3; Third, #2.
1. Messrs. de Rothschild, Acton.
2. C. Bayer, Esq., Forest Hill (gr. W. Taylor).
3. Earl of Harrington, Derby.
Class 4.—Grapes, 8 distinct varieties, 2 bunches of each.
First Prize, £2. 10s.; Second, £1. 10s.; Third, £1.
1. Sir Geo. Russell, Bart., M.P., Reading (gr. F. Cole).
2. Mr. J. Jones, Malvern.
3. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury.
Class 5.—Grapes, Black Hamburgh, 3 bunches.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. J. W. Fleming, Esq., Romsey (gr. W. Mitchell).
2. C. Bayer, Esq., Forest Hill.
3. Messrs. de Rothschild, Acton.
Class 6.—Grapes, Madresfield Court, 3 bunches.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. C. Bayer, Esq., Forest Hill.
2. W. K. D’Arcy, Esq., Stanmore.
3. Mrs. Wingfield, Ampthill.
Class 7.—Grapes, Gros Colmar or Gros Maroc, 3 bunches of
either.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. Mr. J. Jones, Malvern.
2. Messrs. de Rothschild, Acton.
3. Sir George Russell, Bart., M.P., Reading.
Class 8.—Grapes, Alicante, 3 bunches.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. Sir George Russell, Bart., M.P., Reading.
2. Mr. J. Bury, Byfleet.
8. H. Tate, Esq., Streatham (gr. W. Howe).
Class 9.—Grapes, Lady Downes (Black), 3 bunches.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. W. K. D’Arcy, Esq., Stanmore.
2. Mrs. Wingfield, Ampthill.
3. C. R. Scrase-Dickins, Esq., Horsham (gr. A. Kemp).
Cee i ae, vee
822 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 10.—Grapes, any other Black Grape, 3 bunches.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. J. W. Fleming, Chilworth.
2. R. Ovey, Esq., Henley-on-Thames (gr. W. Smith).
3. W. K. D’Arcy, Esq., Stanmore. ©
Class 11.—Grapes, Muscat of Alexandria, 3 bunches.
First Prize, £2; Second, £1. 10s.; Third, 15s.
1. Sir George Russell, Bart., M.P., Reading.
2. Earl of Harrington, Derby.
83. Messrs. de Rothschild, Acton.
Class 12.—Grapes, any other White Grapes, 3 bunches.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. Messrs. de Rothschild, Acton.
2. C. Bayer, Esq., Forest Hill.
3. Miss Ridge, Englefield Green (gr. G. Lane).
Class 18.— Figs, 1 dish of one variety.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 7s.; Third, 3s.
1. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich (gr. W. Messenger).
2. C. E. Strachan, Esq., Hemel Hempstead (gr. H.
Folkes).
3. J. W. Fleming, Esq., Chilworth.
Class 14,—Collection of Hardy Fruit, not exceeding 50 dishes,
grown entirely in the open.
First Prize, £4. 10s.; Second, £8; Third, £1. 10s.
1. Earl Percy, Brentford (gr. G. Wythes).
2. Col. E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester (gr. J. Powell).
3. Lord Foley, Esher (gr. J. Miller).
Class 15.—-Collection of Hardy Fruit, not exceeding 36 dishes,
grown partly or entirely under glass to illustrate Orchard House
Culture.
First Prize, £4. 10s.; Second, £3.
1. Sir Mark W. Collet, Bart., Sevenoaks (gr. R. Potter).
2. Sir J. W. Pease, Bart.. M.P., Guisboro’.
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 323
_ Drviston I.
Open to Nurserymen only.
Norre.—As in all other Divisions, so also in Division II., all the Exhibits
must have been grown by the Exhibitor. Exhibitors must not com-
pete in both Classes 18 and 19. In this Division the number of Fruits
was not limited, and the Baskets or Dishes might, if desired, be of a
size not exceeding 15 inches in diameter if circular, or 19in. by 15 in.
if rectangular.
Class 16.—Collection of Fruit Trees bearing Fruit, in pots.
Prizes, Gold, Silver Gilt, or Silver Medals. (Fig. 86.)
1. Messrs. Rivers & Son, Sawbridgeworth.
Class 17.—Collection of Hardy Fruits, grown partly or entirely
under Glass, to illustrate Orchard House Culture.
Prizes, Gold, Silver Gilt, or Silver Medals.
1. Messrs. George Bunyard & Co., Maidstone.
Class 18.—Collection of not less than 75, or more than 100,
distinct varieties of Hardy Fruits, in baskets or dishes, grown
entirely in the open air; to be arranged on a table of about
24 ft. by 6 ft. or an equivalent space; Foliage plants may be
added and branches of any fruit-bearing trees or bushes.
Prizes, Gold or Silver Gilt, or Silver Medals.
1. Messrs. George Bunyard & Co., Maidstone.
2. Mr. H. Berwick, Sidmouth.
Class 19.—Collection of not less than 80, or more than 50,
distinct varieties of Hardy Fruits, in baskets or dishes, grown
entirely in the open air; to be arranged on a table about
24 ft. by 3 ft. or an equivalent space; Foliage plants may be
added and branches of any fruit-bearing trees or bushes.
Prizes, Silver Gilt or Silver Medals.
1. Mr. J. Colwill, Sidmouth.
2. Mr. A. Wyatt, Hounslow.
Class 20.—Collection of not less than 380, or more than 50,
distinct varieties of Pears, in baskets or dishes, grown entirely
in the open air; to be arranged on a table of about 24 ft. by 3 ft. -
or an equivalent space; Foliage plants may be added and
branches of any fruit-bearing trees or bushes.
Prizes, Silver Gilt or Silver Medals.
1. Mr. H. Berwick, Sidmouth.
824 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Fia. 86.—AprLte TREE in Por (Gardeners’ Magazine).
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 825
; Class 21.—Collection of not less than 30, or more than 50,
distinct varieties of Apples, in baskets or dishes, grown entirely
in the open air; to be arranged on a table of about 24 ft. by 3 ft.
or an equivalent space; Foliage plants may be added and
branches of any fruit-bearing trees or bushes.
, Prizes, Silver Gilt or Silver Medals.
1. Mr. J. Basham, Newport, Mon.
Class 22.—Collection of fruit-bearing branches of sprays, of
any kind or variety of various fruit bushes or trees, to occupy a
table not exceeding 24 ft. by 3 ft. No awards.
Drviston ITI.
Fruits grown in the Open Air.
Open to Gardeners and Amateurs only.
Notre.—Exhibitors could compete in one Class only of Classes 23, 24, 25;
of 26, 27; of 29, 30; of 31, 32, 33, 34; of 35, 36; of 37, 38; of 39, 40;
of 41, 42; of 43, 44.
Class 28.—Apples, 24 dishes, distinct, 16 Cooking, 8 Dessert.
The latter to be placed in the front row.
First Prize, £4; Second, £2; Third, £1. 10s.
- 1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone (gr. G. Woodward).
| 2. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross (gr. C. Bayford).
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham (gr. G. Goldsmith).
Class 24.—Apples, 12 dishes, distinct, 8 Cooking, 4 Dessert.
The latter to be placed in the front row.
First Prize, £2; Second, £1; Third, 15s.
1. J. K. D. W. Digby, .Esq., Sherborne (gr. W. G.
Pragnell).
2. T. W. Startup, Esq., Maidstone (gr. B. Miller).
3. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge (gr. J. Hill).
Class 25.—Apples, 9 dishes, distinct, 6 Cooking, 3 Dessert.
The latter to be placed in the front row.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, 15s.
1. Mrs. Crawford, Gatton (gr. W. Slogrove).
2. J. T. Charlesworth, Esq., Nutfield (gr. T. W. Herbert).
Class 26.—Cooking Apples, 6 dishes, distinct.
First Prize £1; Second, 15s.; Third, 10s.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. T. Oliverson, Esq., Kast Sutton (gr. W. Lewis).
3. Dowager Lady Freake, Twickenham (gr. W. Rickwood).
826 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 27.—Cooking Apples, 3 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 7s.; Third, 5s.
1. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
3. Mr. A. Brook, Mereworth.
Class 28.—Six dishes of Bramley’s Seedling Apple. Prizes
given by Messrs. H. Merryweather, The Nurseries, Southwell.
First Prize, £3; Second, £2; Third, £1.
1. J. Colman, Esq., Gatton (gr. W. King).
2. J. Hargreaves, Hsq., Reading (gr. T. Turton).
3. H. H. Hurnard, Esq., Attleborough (gr. J. Bowery).
Class 29.—Dessert Apples, 6 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, £1; Second, 15s.; Third, 10s.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. T. W. Startup, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 30.—Dessert Apples, 3 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 7s. ; Third, 5s.
1. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
2. C. R. Serase-Dickins, Esq., Horsham.
8. Sir Mark Collet, Bart., Sevenoaks.
Class 81.—Dessert Pears, 12 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, £2. 15s.; Second, £1. 15s.; Third, £1.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
Class 32.— Dessert Pears, 9 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, £2; Second, £1; Third, 1és.
1. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge (gr. W.
Cotterell).
2. G. R. Brougham, Esq., Carshalton (gr. W. Jones).
3. Dowager Lady Freake, Twickenham (gr. A. Rickwood).
Class 33.—Dessert Pears, 6 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, 15s.; Third, 10s.
1. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
2. Mrs. Crawford, Gatton.
3. Rev. O. L. Powels, Weybridge (gr. A. Basill).
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 527
Class 34.—Dessert Pears, 3 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, 15s.; Second, 10s.; Third, 5s.
1. G. N. Field, Esq., Sevenoaks (gr. R. Edwards).
2. W. M. Cazalet, Esq., Tonbridge (gr. G. Fennell).
8. O. A. Smith, Esq., Kast Grinstead (gr. C. Harris).
Class 35.—Cooking Pears, 3 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, 15s.; Second, 10s.; Third, ds.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. FE. M. Lonergan, Esq., Reading (gr. R. Chamberlain).
Class 36.—Cooking Pears, 1 dish, of one variety.
First Prize, 7s.; Second, 5s.; Third, 38s.
1. A. O. Smith, Esq., East Grinstead.
2. Mr. H. Stock, Petersham.
3. H. Padwick, Esq., Horsham (gr. J. Webb).
Class 37.—Peaches, 8 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, £1. 10s.; Second, £1; Third, 10s.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury (gr. F. Harris).
3. Mrs. Druce, Upper Gatton (gr. W. Mancey).
Class 88.—Peaches, 1 dish of one variety.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 7s.; Third, 3s.
1. J. W. Fleming, Esq., Chilworth.
2. Miss Ridge, Englefield Green.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 39.—Nectarines, 8 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, £1. 10s.
1. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury.
Class 40,—Nectarines, 1 dish of one variety.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 7s.; Third, 3s.
1. Hon. H. W. Long, M.P., Trowbridge (gr. W. Strugnell).
2. C. R. W..Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
3. F. W. Marter, Esq., Byfleet (gr. P. Bradley).
Class 44.—Plums, 4 dishes of dessert, distinct.
First Prize, £1; Second, 15s.; Third, 10s.
1, C.K. Strachan, Esq., Hemel Hempstead (gr. J. Folkes).
2. Lord Braybrooke, Saffron Walden (gr. Jas. Vert).
3. Right Hon. W. H. Long, M.P., Trowbridge.
828 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 42,—Plums, 1 dish of Dessert, of one variety, not
Gages.
First Prize, 7s.; Second, 5s.; Third, 3s.
1. Lord Braybrooke, Saffron Walden.
2. J. Hargreaves, Esq., Reading.
3. G. N. Field, Esq., Sevenoaks.
Class 48.—Plums, 4 dishes of Cooking, distinct.
First Prize, £1; Second, 15s.; Third, 10s.
1. Earl of Harrington, Derby.
2. Thos. Gooch, Esq., Hemel Hempstead (gr. C. Sim).
3. Earl of Galloway, Garliestown, N.B. (gr. C. Day).
Class 44,—Plums, 1 dish of Cooking, of one variety.
First Prize, 7s. ; Second, 5s.; Third, 3s.
1. Rev. H. Golding Palmer, Reading (gr. B. Osborne).
2. Thos. Gooch, Esq., Hemel Hempstead.
3. Earl of Harrington, Derby.
Class 45.—Gage Plums, 1 dish.
First Prize, 7s.; Second, 5s.; Third, 3s.
1. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
2. Hon. G. M. Fortescue, Maidenhead (gr. C. Herrin).
3. Rev. H. Golding Palmer, Reading.
Class 46.—Damsons, Prunes, and Bullaces, 4 dishes, distinct.
First Prize, 15s.
1. W. M. Cazalet, Esq., Tonbridge (gr. G. Fennell).
Drviston LV.
Single Dishes of Fruit grown in the open ai.
Open to Gardeners and Amateurs only.
Except in Classes 93 and 94 given by Messrs. Pearson, of Chil —
well, the Prizes in Division IV. were always First, 7s. ;
Second, 5s.; Third, 3s.
Class 47,—Adams’ Pearmain.
1. Duchess of Cleveland, Battle (gr. W. Camm).
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
8. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 329
Class 48.—Allen’s Everlasting.
1. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
2. Hon. F. W. Buxton, Sawbridgeworth (gr. W. H.
Godden).
3. Mr. J. Spottiswood, Brighton.
Class 49.—Baumann’s Red Winter Reinetie.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidsone (gr. J. McKenzie).
2. Captain Carstairs, Newbury (gr. C. Ross).
3. Viscountess Portman, Uckfield (gr. H. C. Prinsep).
Class 50.—Blenheim Orange.
1. Hon. F. W. Buxton, Sawbridgeworth.
2. Mr. G. Chambers, Mereworth.
3. J. Colman, Gatton (gr. W. King).
Class 51.—Brownlees’ Russet.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Viscountess Portman, Uckfield.
3. Dowager Lady Freake, Twickenham.
A ee.)
é Class 52.—Claygate Pearmain.
1, Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Viscountess Portman, Uckfield.
3. Hon. F. W. Buxton, Sawbridgeworth.
Class 53.—Court Pendu Plat.
1. E. Dresden, Esq., Bury St. Edmunds (
Tallack).
2. Captain Carstairs Newbury.
3. F. M. Lonergan, Esq., Reading.
eet fl:
oD
Class 54.—Cox’s Orange Pippin.
1. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
2. J. Colman, Esq., Gatton.
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 55.—Egremont Russet.
S 1. T. W. Startup, Esq., West Farleigh, Kent.
; 9. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
4 Class 56.—Fearn’s Pippin.
% 1. E. Dresden, Esq., Bury St. Edmunds.
2. F.S. W. Cornwallis, Ksq., Linton, Kent.
3. G. R. Brougham, Esq., Carshalton.
330 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 57.—Gascoyne’s Scarlet.
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Acton (gr. J. Hudson).
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 58.—King of the Pippins.
1. E. Dresden, Esq., Bury St. Edmunds.
2. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
3. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross,
Class 59.—King of Tomkins County.
1. J. Hargreaves, Eisq., Reading.
2. E. Dresden, Esq., Bury St. Edmunds.
3. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
Class 60.—Mabbot’s Pearmain.
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Viscountess Portman, Uckfield.
Class 61.—Mannington’s Pearmain.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
3. J. Hargreaves, Esq. Reading.
Class 62.—Margil.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
3. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
Class 68.—Mother (American).
“1. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
2. F. 8S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 64.—Ribston Pippin.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
3. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
Class 65.—Scarlet Nonpareil.
1. Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Acton.
2. Captain Carstairs, Newbury.
3. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
Class 66.—Sturmer Pippin.
1. J. K. D. W. Digby, Esq., Sherborne.
2. F. M. Lonergan, Ksq., Reading.
8. Captain Carstairs, Newbury.
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 331
Class 67.—William’s Favourite.
8. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester
Class 68.—Worcester Pearmain.
1. J. Colman, Esq., Gatton.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. C. H. Berners Esq., Ipswich.
Class 69.—Any other variety of Eating Apple.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone, with ‘St.
Kdmunds Pippin.’
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham, with ‘ Gravenstein.’
8. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone, with ‘ Washington.’
Class 70.—Alfriston.
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. T. Oliverson, Esq., East Sutton.
Class 71.—Beauty of Kent.
1. F. M. Lonergan, Esq., Reading.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Rey. A. O. Powels, Weybridge.
Class 72.—Beauty of Stoke. No awards.
Class 73.—Bismarck.
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Capt. Carstairs, Newbury.
Class 74,—Bramley’s Seedling.
1. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
2. J. H. Salmon, Ksq., Chester (gr. §. Lyon).
3. C. R. W. Adeane, Ksq., Cambridge».
Class 75,—Cellini.
1. Sir E.G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
8. Col. E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
Class 76.—Cox’s Pomona.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Col. E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart, Horsham.
Class 77.—Duchess of Oldenburg.
1. Mr. J. Culton, Castle Douglas, N.B.
2. J. T. Charlesworth, EKsq., Nutfield.
3. Sir E. G, Loder, Bart., Horsham.
832 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 78.—Dumelow’s Seedling, syn. Wellington
Normanton Wonder.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. J. K. D. W. Digby, Esq., Sherborne.
3. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
Class 79.—Ecklinville Seedling.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Mr. J. Spottiswood, Brighton.
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 80.—Emperor Alexander.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 81.—Frogmore Prolific.
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. C. Lee Campbell, Ksq., Ross.
3. J. K. D. W. Digby, Esq., Sherborne.
Class 82.—Golden Noble.
1. G. Chambers, Esq., Mereworth.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 88.—Golden Spire.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. T. Oliverson, Esq., East Sutton.
Class 84,—Grenadier.
1. Hon. G. M. Fortescue, Maidenhead.
2. T. Oliverson, Esq., East Sutton.
3. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
Class 85.—Hawthornden (New).
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Mr. A. Brook, Mereworth.
J. T. Charlesworth, Esq., Nutfield.
Class 86.—Hormead Pearmain.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
Class 87.—Lane’s Prince Albert.
1. Capt. Carstairs, Newbury.
2. C. Lee Campbell, Ross.
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
and
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 333
Class 88.—Lord Derby.
4 1. Rev. O. L. Powels, Weybridge.
; 2. W.N. Cazalet, Esq., Tonbridge.
8. G. H. Field, Esq., Sevenoaks.
Class 89.—Lord Grosvenor.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Hon. G. M. Fortescue, Maidenhead.
3. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury.
Class 90.—Lord Suffield.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. F, M. Lonergan, Reading.
Class 91.—Mére de Menage.
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Capt. Carstairs, Newbury.
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 92.—New Northern Greening.
1. Capt. Carstairs, Newbury.
2. Mr. A. Brook, Mereworth.
Class 98. Newton Wonder (Northern Counties).
First Prize, £1; Second, 10s. ; presented by Messrs. J. R.
Pearson & Sons, Chilwell, Notts.
1. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
2. H. H. Hurnard, Esq., Attleboro’ (gr. J. Bowery).
Class 94,—Newton Wonder (Southern Counties).
First Prize, £1; Second, 10s.; Third, 5s.; presented by Messrs.
J. R. Pearson & Sons, Chilwell, Notts.
1. G. H. Field, Esq., Sevenoaks.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. Philip Crowley, Esq., Croydon.
Class 95.—Peasgood’s Nonesuch.
1. F. §. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Bishop of Bath and Wells, Wells.
3. Horticultural College, Swanley.
Class 96.—Pott’s Seedling.
1. J. Hargreaves, Esq., Reading.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
8. Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Acton.
334 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 97,—Royal Jubilee.
1. Captain Carstairs, Newbury.
Class 98.—Sandringham.
1. F. 8S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Earl Percy, Brentford.
3. Captain Carstairs, Newbury.
Class 99.—Seaton House. No award.
Class 100.—Spencer’s Favourite.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. G. R. Brougham, Esq., Carshalton.
3. T. W. Startup, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 101.—Stirling Castle.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Right Hon. W. H. Long, M.P., Trowbridge.
3. J. Colman, Esq., Gatton.
Class 102.—-Stone’s (syn. Loddington Seedling).
1. F. 8. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Mr. A. Brook, Mereworth.
Class 103.—The Queen.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Hon. G. M. Fortescue, Maidenhead.
Class 104.—Tower of Glamis.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Mr. A. Brook, Mereworth.
3. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
Class 105.—Tyler’s Kernel.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. C. R. W. Adeane, Esq., Cambridge.
3. Rev. O. L. Powels, Weybridge.
Class 106.—Warner’s King.
1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Mr. G. Chambers, Mereworth.
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 107,—Any other variety of Cooking Apple.
“1. F. S. W. Cornwallis, Esq., Maidstone, with ‘ Dutch
Codlin.’
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. 335
2. Duchess of Cleveland, Battle (gr. W. Camm), with
‘Lady Henniker.’
8. W. M. Cazalet, Esq., Tonbridge, with ‘ Castle ees
Class 108.—Bergamotte Esperen.
1. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
2. Captain Carstairs, Newbury.
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 109.—Beurré Bosc.
1. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge.
3. Rev. H. Golding Palmer, Reading.
Class 110.—Beurré d’Anjou.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 111.—Beurré Diel.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Earl Percy, Brentford.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 112.— Beurré Dumont.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 118.—Beurré Hardy.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Viscountess Portman, Uckfield.
3. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
Class 114,—Beurré Superfin.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. H. Padwick, Esq., Horsham.
Class 115.—Bon Chrétien ( Williams’).
1. Karl of Galloway, Garliestown, N.B.
Class 116.—Comte du Lamy. 3
1. J. Hargreaves, Esq., Reading.
2. J. T. Charlesworth, Esq., Nutfield.
3. Sir KE. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 117.— Conference.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Mrs. Crawford, Gatton.
3. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
836 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Class 118.—Conseiller (or Maréchal) de la Cour.
1. E. Dresden, Esq., Bury St. Edmunds.
2. Rev. O. L. Powels, Weybridge.
3. C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Ross.
Class 119.—Doyenné du Comice.
1. Colonel E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
2. Colonel Archer-Houblon, Bishop Stortford (gr. B.
Calvert).
3. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 120.—Duchesse de Bordeaux.
1. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
Class 121.—Durondeau.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. J. K. D. W. Digby, Esq., Sherborne.
3. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge.
Class 122,—Easter Beurré.
1. Col. Archer-Houblon, Saffron Walden.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Col. KE. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
Class 128.— Emile d’Heyst.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Right Hon. W. H. Long, M.P., Trowbridge.
8. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 124.—Fondante d’Automne.
1. Rev. O. L. Powels, Weybridge.
2. J. Hargreaves, Esq., Reading.
3. Sir EK. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 125.—Fondante de Thirriott.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
3. J. W. Melles, Esq., Chingford (gr. J. ae
Class 126.—Glou Morceau.
1. Col. KE. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Col. Archer-Houblon, Saffron Walden.
Class 127.—Josephine de Malines.
1. Col. E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester.
2. J. T. Charlesworth, Esq., Nutfield.
8. Col. Archer-Houblon, Saffron Walde .
\
|
neteuiitiented temeedies seein ene bee
;
d
:
:
e
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. Sot
Class 128.—Louise Bonne of Jersey.
1. H. F. Walker, Esq., Balcombe (gr. J. Coles).
2. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
8. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 129.—Marie Benoist.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. C. H. Berners, Esq., Ipswich.
3. Earl Percy, Brentford.
Class 180.—Marie Louise.
1. Rev. H. Golding Palmer, Reading.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 1381.—Marie Louise d’Uccle.
1. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
Class 182.—Marguerite Marillat. (Fig. 87.)
1. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. G. H. Field, Esq., Sevenoaks.
Class 188.—Nouvelle Fulvie.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. Earl Percy, Brentford.
Class 134,.—Olivier de Serres.
1. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. J. W. Melles, Esq., Chingford.
Class 185.—Pitmaston Duchess. (Fig. 88.)
1. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge.
2. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
3. O. A. Smith, Esq., East Grinstead.
Class 1386.—Seckle.
1. Captain Carstairs, Newbury.
2. J. Hargreaves, Esq., Reading.
3. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury.
Class 137.—Souvenir du Congrés. (Fig. 89.)
1. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
2. W.N. Cazalet, Esq., Tonbridge.
F (ouwevbnyy (SLIUAPLD |) ) “LV TRU AL aLIuaaAeuvyy, 4vag— LS “lA ;
OFFICIAL PRIZE LIST. $39
Class 188.—Thompson’s.
1. Col. E. Brymer, M.P., Dorchester,
2. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge.
3. Mrs. Crawford, Gatton.
Class 189.—Triomphe de Vienne.
No awards.
Class 140.—Winter Nelis.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone.
2. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham.
3. Lady Henry Somerset, Ledbury.
Class 141.—Any other variety.
1. Roger Leigh, Esq., Maidstone, with ‘ Gansel’s
Bergamot.’
2. Mr. J. Spottiswood, Brighton, with ‘Duchesse d’An-
gouleme.’
8. Sir E. G. Loder, Bart., Horsham, with ‘ Princess.’
Division V.
The Veitch Prizes for Flavour.
Open to Amateurs and Gentlemen’s Gardeners only.
Class 142,—The best flavoured Apple.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 5s.
1. Viscountess Portman, Uckfield, with ‘ Ripston Pippin.’
2. Hon. G. M. Fortescue, Maidenhead, with ‘Cox’s
Orange.’
‘ Class 143.—The best flavoured Pear.
First Prize, 10s.; Second, 5s.
1. Rev. H. Golding Palmer, Reading, with ‘Louise Bonne.’
2. Sir William N. Geary, Bart., Tonbridge, with ‘ Fon-
dante d’Automne.’
JUDGES. 841
JUDGES.
The following gentlemen kindly acted as judges, and deserve
the best thanks of the Society for their really arduous labours,
v1z.—
Mr. H. Balderson | Mr. H. Markham
Mr. A. F. Barron, V.M.H. | Mr. J. MeIndoe, V.M.H.
Mr. W. Bates | Mr. G. Norman
Mr. E. Beckett | Mr. A. H. Pearson
Mr. G. Bunyard, V.M.H. Mr. W. Pope
Mr. J. Cheal Mr. T. F. Rivers, V.M.H.
Mr. W. Crump, V.M.H. Mr. J. Smith, V.M.H.
Mr. A. Dean Mr. O. Thomas, V.M.H.
Mr. C. Herrin Mr. J. Walker
Mr. J. Hudson, V.M.H. Mr. J. Wright, V.M.H.
Mr. W. Jarman: Mr. G. Wythes, V.M.H.
MISCELLANEOUS EXHIBITS.
Her Majesty the Queen (gr. Mr. Owen Thomas, V.M.H.)
sent a magnificent collection of Apples, Pears, Grapes, Pines,
and Tomatos. (Fig. 90.)
From the Society’s Gardens (Superintendent, Mr. S. T.
Wright) came a very interesting collection of 54 varieties of
more or less known Pears and 16 varieties of Grapes.
Messrs. James Veitch, of Chelsea, sent a very large collection
of Apples and Pears.
Messrs. Laing, of Forest Hill, sent a fine collection of Apples
and Pears.
Messrs. Sutton, of Reading, sent a brightly coloured exhibit
of Tomatos in thirteen large baskets.
Messrs. Cheal, of Crawley, sent a beautiful exhibit of Apples
and Pears.
Messrs. Fisher, Son & Sibray, of Sheffield, sent 85 varieties
of Apples and Pears, together with some pretty little specimen-
trained trees.
Messrs. Peed, of West Norwood, sent a large collection of
Apples and Pears, and some good Grapes.
Messrs. Spooner, of Hounslow, sent a fine collection of
Apples and Pears.
Mr. B. Wells, Crawley, sent some Apples. —
Mr. Horne, of Cliffe, sent/Apples.
842 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Fic. 89.—Prar Sovuventr pu Coneres. (Gardener
MISCELLANEOUS EXHIBITS. 843
The Horticultural College, Swanley (Principal, F. G.
Powell, Esq.), sent Apples and Pears, together with excellent-
looking specimens of Fruits bottled at the College.
Messrs. Gaymer, Attleborough, sent specimens of a multitude
of cider Apples and their produce.
Messrs. Paul, of Cheshunt, sent some nice Apples. _
| Several nurserymen sent exhibits of Flowers.
CONFERENCE.
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 380.
The Chair was taken by Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.,
_ President of the Society, at 3 pP.m., who called on Mr. George
Bunyard, V.M.H., of Maidstone, who read the following
paper :—
PROGRESS IN FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN
VICTORIA’S REIGN, 1837-1897.
By Mr. Grorae Bunyarp, V.M.H.
It is somewhat difficult to carry back one’s mind to the
condition of fruit culture that existed sixty years ago, and I
propose, therefore, to ask you in imagination to pay a visit to a
well-kept garden of 1837, to inspect the style of culture then in
use, and to take note of the varieties of fruit which were
cultivated in it.
We will suppose that the garden is a large square walled-in
area of two or threeacres. On the outside the line of wall facing
south would be broken by a plain building in the centre, lofty
inside, with massive pillars, and windows reaching to the ground,
not heated, as nowadays, but capable of resisting a fair amount
of frost.
, In this building one would find large Orange and Lemon
- trees in tubs, the earlier introduced varieties of Camellias
(probably from Chandler’s at Vauxhall), some Oleanders, large
trees of Aloysia citriodora (the Lemon plant), Pomegranates,
Fuchsias, and possibly a number of Bay trees, and other shrubs,
which in summer time would be placed out on the terraces.
The outside walls, right and left, would be clothed with
844 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
(Gardeners’ Magazine.)
Fic. 90.—Exuipirep by H.M. THE QUEEN.
FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 345
Magnolias, interspersed with hardy Vines, trained uprightly, and
with Roses of the Ayrshire type, an opening in the wall reveal-
ing a gateway leading to the kitchen-garden.
The north side would probably be at the back of the stables,
and leading from them directly through the centre would be a
12 ft. road, equally dividing the garden, for the purpose of
getting in manure, clearing away rubbish, and other purposes.
This central alley would be bordered on each side with ancient
Pears and Apples, trained in the basin form, of a rigidly uniform
pattern, furnished with a vast quantity of twiggy spurs bearing
a sprinkling of fruit-—in fact, more for ornament than use.
The Apples might be represented by such old favourites as—
Alfriston. Golden Reinette. — Manks Nonpareil.
Blenheim Orange. Gooseberry. Northern Greening.
Court of Wick. Golden Harvey. Norfolk Beaufin.
Court Pendu Plat. Hawthornden. Old Nonpareil.
Devon Quarrenden. Joaneting. Scarlet Nonpareil.
Downton Pippin. Keswick Codlin. White Paradise.
Dutch Codlin. Kerry Pippin. Wellington.
French Crab. Lemon Pippin. Winter Quoining.
And the Pears by—
Aston Town. Catillac or Pound Pear. Swan’s Egg.
Althorp Crasanne. Chaumontel. St. Germain.
Autumn Bergamot. Citron des Carmes. Vicar of Winkfield.
Beurré Diel. Dunmore (Knight’s). Windsor.
Brown Beurré. Kaster Beurré. Winter Crasanne.
Bishop’s Thumb. Nec Plus Meuris. Williams’ Bon Chrétien.
Colmar (green).
And in the North of England by—
Green Yair. Beurré Gris. Muirfowl’s Egg, &c.
We will suppose a sloping border 18 feet wide to run entirely
round the garden in front of the walls, bordered by a 6-foot
path, and there will be either square quarters bordered by Espa-
lier trees, or wedge-shaped beds converging in the centre towards
a large circular water-tank, with York stone border, having
flights of steps for the men to dip their water-cans. This tank
would have a few gold fish in it, besides Water Lilies, Flags, and
Bullrushes.
The wall facing south would be planted with Peaches and
Nectarines, interspersed with hardy Grapes; while Apricots would
occupy the western side. The Peaches would probably consist of—
Acton Scot. Karly Admirable. Noblesse.
Catherine. Late Admirable. Newington.
Early Anne. Malta. Royal George.
D
846 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
And selections from—
Avant. Incomparable. Nutmeg.
Chancellor. Montauban. Pavie Royale, &c.
Double Montagne.
The Nectarines might perhaps be selected from—
Brugnon. Murrey. Temple.
Clermont. Newington. Violette Hative.
Elruge. Red Roman. White.
Hunt’s Tawny. Scarlet.
The Apricots might probably consist of —
Breda. Orange. Turkey.
Brussels. Roman.
The Vines would be Black and White Sweetwater, Black
Cluster, White Muscadine, and perhaps a few Continental novel-
ties on trial, such as D’Arboyce, Rhenish, Lombardy, and others
now unknown.
On the east and west walls we should find Pears, mingled
with Plums. The latter would very probably be the successors
of a yet more ancient race of Pears, which had given out from
old age. These wall Pears would be enormous horizontal and
formally trained trees, interspersed with fan-trained examples ;
Jargonelle, bearing a healthy lot of leaves, with a few large
fruits on the tips of the branches; Chaumontel, of which the
only healthy portion (the top line of boughs) would carry a few
large Pears; Passe Colmar, a faggot of spurs and leaves, bear-
ing a crop every other year; Gansel’s Bergamot in a worse
plight than the Chaumontel, cankered and grievous, but grown
because the owner has a fancy for a dish or two in the pheasant
season ; Windsor, like an Elm for robust growth, giving a few
enormous and brilliantly coloured fruits, a special food for the
wasps and bees; the then new Glou Morceau and Marie Louise
would be fine young trees bearing a lot of good fruit, though
perhaps too thickly set with lateral boughs; besides Gratioli of
Jersey, Louise Bonne, Duchesse d’Angouléme, March Bergamot,
Beurré Diel, then of the first rank, with Nec Plus Meuris for a
late sort, and Catillac for stewing.
On the east and west walls Amber Bigarreau, May Duke, and
Waterloo Cherries would also be trained, and possibly Black
Tartarian, Late Duke, Black Heart, Bleeding Heart, and
Florence. A few of the choicest Dessert Apples, as Ribston, Old
rw. «ia
PR te A. menor
FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 347
and Scarlet Nonpareils, Margil, &c., would be placed on the west
walls ; a position, by the way, which might sometimes even now
be given them with advantage.
The Plums on east and west walls would consist of—
Coe’s Golden Drop Old and New Orleans Red and White Mag-
Coe’s Late Red Prince of Wales num
Goliath Purple Impératrice Washington
Green Gage Perdrigon
with Victoria,'then called ‘“ Royal Dauphin,” as a recent variety ;
and if in Kent, possibly the Diamond and Kirke’s Blue.
The back of the stables (facing north) would have large rider
trained Pear trees, the Beurré Kirke, with Knight’s introduc-
tions, Dunmore, Monarch, and Rouse Lench ; and late Plums
like Coe’s Late Red and Impératrice.
On the north wall we should only find Morello Cherries,
with upright trained Gooseberries* and Currants for a late
crop.
The Espaliers flanking the paths would mainly be Dessert
Apples, including those before named, with—
Beauty of Kent. Hollandbury. Pearson’s Plate.
Colonel Vaughan. King of Pippins. Polinia Pearmain.
Fearn’s Pippin. Loan’s Pearmain. Royal Pearmain.
Golden Pippins (sorts). Nonesuch (old). Ribston Pippin.
Hanwell Souring. Margil. Red Astrachan.
Hoary Morning. Old Dutch Codlin. Ross Nonpareil.
All would be of great age, with perfect bundles of spurs on
their old arms, carefully and hardly pruned as to their branches,
but with roots which had never been disturbed from the day
they were planted, probably more than half a century before.
It may be remarked that in those days Dessert Apples were
much smaller than they are now.
In the south-west corner we should find Brunswick and
White Marseilles Figs, with large limbs rising from a stool
perhaps a hundred years old.
In no class of fruit has greater progress been made than in
_ the Strawberry. Previous to 1837 Black Prince, Keen’s Seed-
ling (1821), and Carolina were the only good varieties; and the
gardens of the period were filled with such forgotten families as
Carmines, Hudson’s Bay, Scarlets of several varieties, Rose-
* Cordon Gooseberries are mentioned in the Florist for 1840.
D2
848 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
berry, Cones of all sorts, Glazed Pine, Bostock, Chili, and a
great number of the Hautbois aud Alpine varieties.
British Queen was in commerce in 1840, and President about
1850. The 1842 catalogue of the Royal Horticultural Society
gives a list of twenty-six useful varieties and about 800 others
of no value, or synonymous. These were divided into classes by
Mr. Robert Thompson, the Curator, viz.—Class 1, Scarlets; 2,
Blacks; 3, Pines; 4, Chili; 5, Hautbois; 6, Green; 7, Alpine.
So much for the autumn aspect of the garden. We must,
however, in justice to our forefathers, say that they took intense
pains and trouble to train their trees: the Peaches, Nectarines,
and Apricots were taken away from the walls annually; the
walls washed with a dressing of soot, lime, and sulphur, with
soft soap and clay; while the gathered-up boughs, carefully
secured to poles away from the wall, would be cleansed by
the snows and rains of winter and the free current of air.
After Christmas they would be carefully looked over and
pruned ; each bough and twig correctly trained, by a plumb line
tied to the main trunk, would be replaced on the wall with geo-
metrical precision. Such care would be followed by a timely
finger-and-thumb practice on the fore-right shoots in April. It
being considered sacrilege to ‘‘ knife’’ Peaches, in the early
summer, a few leaves would be taken away to assist the fruit to
colour. Later on a careful thinning of the fruit, judicious lay-
ing in of the finer shoots, and the removal of wood that had
fruited would ensure a crop for the following season.
Such care is seldom exercised, we fear, on wall fruit in these
days, the gardener depending more on his crops from heated and
cool glass-houses.
About this time Messrs. R. Thompson, at the Society’s
Gardens; Ronalds, of Brentford; Wilmot & Chaundy, of
Lewisham ; Thomas Rivers, of Sawbridgeworth; Osborn, of
Fulham; Lee, of Hammersmith; Pearson, of Chilwell; and
Chandler, of Vauxhall, were the giants in fruit-tree culture.
Probably also our landed gentry had more frequent intercourse
with the Continent, which led to an awakened interest in fruit
growing; and from what we can learn and have observed, any
fruit with a French name was then thought to be worthy of
culture, and Britain was flooded with varieties which time and
experience have proved to be worthless for our climate. In fact
FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 349
many were but perry and cider fruits, and probably the Con-
tinental stocks as well as most of our British ones were then far
from correct to name. Still some good Continental fruits were
introduced, and are standard varieties at this day. But no doubt
the national dislike to anything foreign operated in some degree
against their general adoption in the provinces. |
Meanwhile new methods had appeared on the scene. The
introduction of glasshouses heated by hot water and the removal
of the duty on window-glass at once gave an impetus to fruit
culture. At first Grapes felt the benefit of the change, and
later on Peaches and Nectarines; but when our great practical
father of garden fruit culture, Mr. Thomas Rivers, of Sawbridge-
worth, adopted the Continental practice of using the Quince
stock for Pears, and the Paradise stock for Apples, the old saying,
“ plant Pears for your heirs,’’ was exploded; and the marvellous
little pyramidal trees a yard high, producing fruit in abundance,
and Bush Apples with a crop that would weigh down the trees
themselves, at once became the rage.
These fancy trees, combined with Mr. Rivers’ practical little
work on “ Root Pruning and Summer Pinching,’’ laid the
foundation of that marvellous culture of garden fruit which has
placed our British produce in the foremost position, whether for
size, beauty, flavour, or quality; and has by degrees made what
were the luxuries of the few in the past the inheritance of all
classes ; for example, good Grapes, once 25s. or 30s. per lb., can
now be had from a shilling to half-a-crown.
The duty was taken off glass in 1845. Timber duties were
modified in 1830. The practical application of hot water for
_heating purposes dates from 1821. Mr. Edward Weeks, of Chelsea,
introduced his tubular saddle boiler in 1835, and Mr. John
Weeks improved on this by constructing his upright tubular
boiler in 1839.
Another factor has been the use of steam saws and planes for
cutting out and shaping suitable timber for rafters, sashes, &e.,
and naturally the use of railways, steamships, and canals for the
conveyance of foreign glass and timber. In fact, it is now
reported that one firm of brothers in the market trade have, at
the present time, as many as 134 acres of glasshouses.
Later on the introduction of the so-called glass-covered walls
and orchard houses created a further stimulus, in which choice
350 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
fruits could be grown to perfection, either planted out or in
pots. Orchard houses are noted in the Florist for 1854, and
proved to be a boon to many who lived in unfavourable climates,
or had no walled gardens, and to Mr. Thos. Rivers again we owe
the introduction of this special mode of culture.
At this time also the Continental Pyramidal, Cordon, Bush,
and fancy trained trees on the French system came into vogue,
and still further advanced our culture and enabled growers to
prove new sorts quickly; as when planted on restricting stocks
(the Quince and the Paradise) it is not unusual to get fruit on
one and two year old trees.
It should be mentioned, however, that the new system fell
into discredit owing to the sale of Apples on Crab, and Pears on
free Pear stocks ; which, while preserving the pyramidal form and
making fine, shapely trees, yet, so to speak, missed the spirit of
the subject, and, becoming infertile and rampant in growth, cast
discredit on the new style of culture for a time ; but this has now
been corrected.
Nowadays every good gardener has added to the regular
garden routine, root pruning of all fruit trees that grow so
rapidly as to become void of fruit buds. This practice has
perhaps more than any other helped on the culture of garden
fruits; and by maintaining a proper balance between the anchor
roots, which develop the woody growth, and the upper or fibrous
roots, which are supposed to nourish the fruit, has thereby
ensured success, should the English spring weather prove
favourable.
There is no doubt that root pruning, combined with the
summer mulching and feeding of those trees that are carrying
heavy crops, embodies the most conspicuous advance in fruit
culture of the Victorian period.
It may be remarked here that the increase in size of Exhibi-
tion Apples and Pears has been wonderful; even those figured
so recently as 1885 in the ‘“ Herefordshire Pomona” are now
exhibited nearly double the size.
A large share of the present practical store of knowledge we
possess as to varieties, culture, and novelties must be justly said
to be due to the energy and painstaking reports of the horti-
cultural press of the past fifty years, not forgetting the publica- —
tions of the Royal Horticultural Society and its valuable work at
FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 851
Chiswick, where so many unknown fruits have been grown, tried,
and reported on.
The old Chiswick collections were brought together by the
energy and knowledge of our late father in pomology, Dr.
Robert Hogg, and were with great labour classified and reported
on by Robert Thompson, the Superintendent of the Society’s
Gardens, whose “‘ Catalogue of Fruits’’ (1842) and the “ Supple-
ment’ (1858) remained the text-books on the subject until Dr.
Hogg brought out his ‘‘ Fruit Manual ”’ in 1866.
Among the most valuable of the Royal Horticultural Society’s
many-sided work is the awarding of certificates to fruits, thus
stamping them with its authority, and helping to bring to notice
many unknown and valuable varieties. On referring to the
published list of awards to fruits it will be found that (excluding
Melons) no less than 224 first-class certificates and awards of
merit have been given to new fruits (1837-97) ; and it may
interest those who question the value of the work done by the
Society’s committees to say that, out of the 224 certificates
eranted, only about fifty varieties have gone out of commerce,
and that through being superseded by better ones. At the same
time it should be remembered that even these superseded awards
were in many cases but the encouraging steps that led to the
further improvements. It would be well if, as individuals, we
all made as few errors of judgment.
In the pomological literature of the period the first place must
be given to the late Dr. Robert Hogg, whose ‘ Fruit Manual”
has become a standard book of reference for all British and
even American fruit growers. The work of Robert Thompson,
of Chiswick, before quoted; the publication of Mr. John
Wright’s essay for the Fruiterers’ Company; Mr. Pearson’s
“ Hardy Fruits for the Midlands”’; Mr. Cheal’s ‘‘ Practical Fruit
Culture’’; and, if it be permitted to mention one’s own efforts,
my “Fruit Farming for Profit,” and many other books have also
supplied valuable information in a popular form. In the earlier
period the ‘‘ Transactions of the Pomological Society ’’ (esta-
blished 1854) ; the Journals of the Royal Horticultural Society
in recent times, with the Reports of the Chiswick Apple and
Pear Conferences, 1888, 1885, 1888; and Mr. Malcolm Dunn’s
Report on the Edinburgh Plum Conference, 1889, supply prac-
tical hints for planters in all districts. “ Scott’s Orchardist,’
852 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
1865, gives a vast bulk of information; and the finest illus-
trated work is undoubtedly Dr. Bull’s “‘ Herefordshire Pomona,”
an édition de luxe in every respect, followed quite recently by
the “ Fruit Growers’ Guide,” by Mr. John Wright, with illustra-
tions by Miss Rivers.
Although published a few years before the date of the Queen’s
accession I should like to draw attention to that grand work of
Hugh Ronalds, which for the period of its publication was a very
remarkable undertaking, the exquisite drawings from nature on
stone being done by Miss Ronalds. I allude to “ Pyrus Malus
Brentfordiensis,’’ London, 1831, which describes and illustrates
about 200 Apples, the best then known in the celebrated Brent-
ford Nurseries.
I need not here detain you by giving a long list of the
varieties introduced—18387 to 1897—but I have prepared some
lists of them, which appear in Appendix B, in which will be
found all the notable varieties, with the dates of their intro-
duction or certificate. In preparing this list great difficulty has
been experienced, as no particular record appears to exist, and I
have therefore placed a “c”’ (for circa) before those not actually
dated in print; and it is interesting to note that at the present
time a new variety of fruit may be certificated in one year and
sent out the next. The spread of horticultural literature and
commercial energy would account for this. The Kcklinville
Apple, known in Ireland in 1800, was not much in commerce
till the late Mr. Dancer, of Chiswick, brought it to notice about
1860, and Cox’s Orange Pippin was some twenty-five years before
it became generally known.
In passing, I must allude to those super-excellent varieties
which have come to the front, and which have, I believe, as the
Americans say, ‘‘come to stay.”’ A list of them will be found in
Appendix C.
I consider that the greatest direct benefit to fruit culture, so
far as the Apple is concerned, was derived from the 1883 Con-
ference held at Chiswick by the Royal Horticultural Society.
This not only brought some fine but little known varieties into
prominence, but, what is of more importance, a tabulated list of
synonymous names was made, and wholesale errors in naming
were corrected. Followed as the Apple Conference was by the
Pear Conference and the Small Fruits Conference, and by various
FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 858
papers read at the meetings, the 1883 Conference served as a
landmark and starting-point for much good work in London and
the provinces. The great Guildhall Show of the Fruiterers’
Company, held as it was in the heart of the City, served to con-
vince Londoners that grand fruit was and could be grown in this
country. The great fruit Shows formerly held by the Crystal
_ Palace Company accurately gauged the rate of progress, and the
Royal Horticultural Society, having taken over these Shows, have
in 1894, 1895, 1896, and 1897 brought together such collections
of autumnal fruits as have never before been seen. It is satis-
factory to find new exhibitors coming to the front yearly from
all parts of the kingdom. Fruit Conferences have also been
held at Chester, Pershore, Worcester, Exeter, and other centres.
It would be out of place here to allude to the enormous
increase in the growth of fruit for market purposes and for pre-
serving ; but I mention it only to impress the fact that success
can be secured only by following the principles and practice of
horticulture ; in short, bringing gardening methods to bear on
farm fruit culture. The annual tables of the Board of Trade
show an enormous yearly increase in land laid down to fruit, and
where this is well done it becomes a paying industry.
Considerable importance also attaches to the commercial
activity of the fruit-tree nurserymen of the present and past
times. The desire to excel in friendly competition in fruit
exhibitions, the placing before the public examples grown with
skill and care, the introduction of novelties, and the carefully
prepared catalogues of the trade have, I believe, been beneficial
factors in the general advance made in fruit culture, tending to
popularise the growth of all kinds for pleasure, profit, or, as a
hobby, to the enormous advantage of the public in the matter of
health and sobriety. In fact, I would go even further, feeling
convinced in this particular matter that a great measure of the
improved health of the large towns is to be traced to the cheap
supplies of fruit and vegetables placed within their reach by
the commercial energy of the growers and distributors; and
still further benefit is to be expected in the future as a result of
the practical lectures now being given by County Council
experts in fruit districts among the intelligent labouring
classes.
Among the practical gardeners of the early years of the era
354 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
special mention should be made of Messrs. T. Jones & Ingram,
of the Frogmore Gardens; the then gardener at Deepdene; J.
Woodbridge, of Syon; Chas. Ross, of Welford Park; Cox, of
Redleaf; Frost, of Dropmore; Fleming, of Trentham; Ingram,
of Belvoir; Speed, of Chatsworth ; Ford, of Leonardslee; Don, —
of Bedgbury ; Luckhurst, of Maidstone; Wildsmith, of Heck-
field; and others now passed away. The forerunner in modern
culture was probably Sir Henry Scudamore Stanhope, of Holme
Lacey, Hereford. In later times Mr. R. D. Blackmore, of
Teddington, has been the pioneer in testing the newer varieties,
and Dr. Hogg’s ‘Fruit Manual’”’ owes no small part of its value
to Mr. Blackmore’s experience. The gardens of Barham Court,
Teston, have of late supplied the champion prize hardy fruits ;
whilst Messrs. Goodacre, Blair, McHattie, Hunter, McIndoe,
and others being the most successful in hot-house fruits.
I have now sketched in outline the “Progress in Fruit
Culture’ during the sixty years of Queen Victoria’s reign.
Much more could be added if time permitted, but I am sure you
will agree that the rate of progress in horticulture has been quite
as rapid and far-reaching as in many other of the industrial arts
and sciences; and I look forward confidently for still greater
progress in the future among the many intelligent gardeners,
nurserymen, and hybridists of our time who are not slow to
avail themselves of the vast opportunities that lie around them.
LIST OF FINE FRUITS IN CULTIVATION, 1837.
APPLES
Alfriston. Gravenstein.
Astrachan, Red. Gloria Mundi.
Beauty of Kent. Hambledon Deux Ans.
Beachamwell. . Hanwell Souring.
Blenheim Orange. Hoary Morning.
Codlin, Manks. Hawthornden.
Codlin, Carlisle. Hollandbury.
Codlin, Keswick. Irish Peach.
Calville White. Joaneting.
Cornish Aromatic. Kent Fillbasket.
Court Pendu Plat. Minchull Crab.
Court of Wick. Margaret or Red Joaneting.
Christie’s Pippin. Margil.
Duchess of Oldenburg. Norfolk Beaufin.
Dutch Mignonne. Nonpareil, Braddick’s.
Dutch Codlin. Nonpareil, Ross.
Devonshire Quarrenden. Nonpareil, Scarlet.
Emperor Alexander. ' Nonesuch, Old.
Flower of Kent. Pearmain, Hereford,
-Pearmain, Claygate.
Pearmain, Royal. |
Pearmain, Scarlet.
Pearmain, Adams’.
Pippin, Cockle’s.
Pippin, Fearn’s.
Pippin, Lemon.
Pippin, Kerry.
Pippin, London.
Pippin, Ribston.
FRUIT CULTURE DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN.
AppLEs—continued.
Pippin, Wormeley.
Pippin, Wyken.
Pippins, King of.
Reinette du Canada.
Reinette Golden.
Rymer or Caldwell.
Royal Russet.
Syke House Russet.
Wellington.
Being 57 out of 250 figured in Ronald’s work, 1842.
In the Catalogue of the Maidstone Nurseries, 1830, besides
the above we find—
Downton Pippin.
French Crab.
Winter Quoining.
Golden Knob.
Prars In 1837.
Aston Town.
Autumn Bergamot.
Beurré Diel.
Black Pear
(Verulam).
Brown Beurré.
Chaumontel.
of Worcester
Kirke’s New Blue.
Impératrice, Blue and White.
Jargonelle.
Green Chisel.
Green Colmar.
Lammas.
Marie Louise.
Uvedale’s St. Germain.
Summer Crasanne.
Crauford or Chalks. Swan’s Egg.
_ Citron des Carmes. Windsor.
Easter Beurré. Williams’ Bon Chrétien.
Pioums In 1837.
Blue Gage. Magnum Bonum, Red.
Coe’s Golden Drop. Magnum Bonum, White.
Green Gage. Orleans, Old.
Goliath. Orleans, Early.
Royal Dauphin or Victoria.*
CHERRIES IN 1837.
Adams’ Crown Heart.
Amber Heart or Kent Bigarreau.
Black Heart.
Florence.
Flemish Red.
Kentish Red.
Black Eagle. Late Duke.
Corone (black). May Duke.
Elton. Waterloo.
. NECTARINES.
Elruge. ; | Violette Hative.
PEACHES.
Bellegarde. | Royal George.
Grosse Mignonne. Violette Hitive.
Noblesse. |
*Gardeners’ Chronicle, June 12, p. 380, says:—‘‘ The
355
famous
Victoria itself was not with us when the Queen’s reign began,” but it
appears to have been cultivated before that date, under the synonyms of
Royal Dauphin and Sharpe’s Emperor.
856 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
APRICOTS.
Breda. | Moorpark.
Fias.
Brunswick. | Ischia, White.
Marseilles, White. ; |
STRAWBERRIES.
Carolina, the small preserving variety known as “ Scarlets.” —
APPENDIX B.—NOTABLE FRUITS INTRODUCED
TO COMMERCE 1887 TO 1897.
+ First Class Certificate R.H.S. with date of award.
* Award of Merit R.H.S. with date of award.
(The dates are given when + or * was awarded.)
APPLES.
*Albury Park Nonesuch ... 1892 | Hormead Pearmain... ...¢. 1885
+Allington PED ion. hae eee | Irish Peach th
*Armorel ... ace, Sean *King Harry ... 1892
*Atalanta ... bataperree fo let King of Tomkins County 1860
tAnnie Elizabeth ... ... 1866 | fLady Henniker... ... 1873
Allen’s Everlasting... ...¢. 1850 tLady Sudeley ... ... ... 1884
Baumann’s Reinette ... 1878 tLord Burghley ...
tBarchard’s Seedling 7 Ae Lord Derby _...
Belle de Pontoise ... ... 1878 *Lord Hindlip ...
tBeauty of Stoke ... ... 1890 Lord Suffield rr
tBeauty of Bath... ... .... 1887 *Lord Grosvenor... _...c. 1878
*Bow Hill Pippin... ... 1893 *May Queen vate aa
*Bismarck ... ... 1887 Mrs. Barron ...
Boston Russet, as Roxbury 1840 tMr. Gladstone ... ... ...
tBramley’s Seedling .. wos Lene Mother (of AD ae ...c. 1850
{Blue Pearmain... ... ... 1893 Melon “a wo. 6a GQ. LOG
*Byford Wonder fn. es L698 Mére de Menage
Brownlees’ Russet . ... 1848 tNewton Wonder
Cellini... Stk tPeasgood’s Nonesuch .
tChelmsford Wonder... ... 1891 Pearmain Mabbott’s _ ...c. 1860
Cox's Pomona... 5 3.27, 4864 Pott’s Seedling... ...
*Cardinal ... .. ots 5 BOG tPrince Albert (Lane’s)
Cox’s Orange Pippin. ..0. 1854 | Queen Caroline Bis: | ,
Duchess of Oldenburg. Rivers’ Codlin... ... ..
Duke of Devonshire vn, LETS Rivers’ Peach . :
Early Rivers ... .. 1893 _ tRoundway Magnum Bonum
Ecklinville Seedling, raised 1800 Royal Jubilee ... “rae
Egremont Russet ..._ ...c. 1883 tSandringham ...
Frogmore Prolific ... ...c. 1845 tSchoolmaster fi
tGascoyne’s Seedling... ... 1887 tSeptember Beauty ...
Gold Medal _... ..c. 1888 +St. Edmund’s Pippin ’
Golden Noble to R.H.S.... 1820 | tStone’s, or Loddington ...
+Grenadier... ... 1883-c.1875 Stirling Castle, raised
Golden Spire set hit seis LTD Striped Beefing, dis.
tHambling’s Seedling ... 1893 Seaton House ... ... se.G
Hawthornden, New sie | The Queen cite) pee
NOTABLE FRUITS INTRODUCED TO COMMERCE 1837 To 1897. 357
AppLEs—continued.
7Tyler’s Kernel ... ... ... 1883 | *Williams’ Favourite 1895-c. 1880
_ Warner’s King,introduced 1800 {Worcester Pearmain ... 1875
*Wealthy ... ... 1893 -c. 1882 | *White Transparent... ... 1895
_ Washington... ... ...c. 1876 Yellow Ingestrie ... ... 1848
Nore.—The exact date of those marked “c” cannot be definitely fixed.
Any reliable information as to dates would be welcomed.
APRICOTS.
tFrogmore aaa Sag vats SCO | Large Early, under its
a ee French name ..._... 1845
CHERRIES.
Belle d’Orléans (Continent) | tEmperor Francis ... ... 1887
1740—1864 {tFrogmore Bigarreau . 1865
Bigarreau Napoleon ...c. 1828 7Géant d’Hedelfingen ... 1896
jHarly Rivers ... ... ... 1870
CURRANTS.
+Black, Champion, or Baldwin’s. Red, La Versaillaise.
7Black, Lee’s Prolific. White Versailles.
Fias.
7Bourjasotte Grise ... ... 1892 tMonaco Bianco... ... ... 1892
7Gourand Noir... ... ... 1865 Poreptaty 2.) CIS. So, BRE
TGrosse Verte ... 1867 TNegro Largo ... ... ... 1892
fLarge Black Douro (Dr. Per. dob 5.02) 2.0 OX -VESSO
a eee 1892 {Violette Sepor... ... ... 1892
GoosEBERRIES.
Meepsake ’... ... «.. .. 1841 Whinham’s Industry ...c. 1860
GRAPES.
Some forty have received awards, but the following are those
which have come into cultivation :—
mweinwick Seedling ... .... 1876 , GrosColmar.... ... ... 1847
*Appley Towers... ... ... 1889 tLady Downes, raised 1835-1862
TBlack Alicante... ... ... 1867 piey FIOGh 262 cc) ces, esx. 2890
Buckland Sweetwater ... 1856 | ‘fMadresfield Court ... ... 1867
Duke of Buccleuch | Muscat Hamburgh ... ce. 1855
tFoster’s White Seedling | Mrs. Pince’s Black Muscat 1863
raised ... ... ... 1835-1845 | Ture. Pearse ...- 4.. i. LOTTA
7Gros Maroc... ... ... 1880 |
NECTARINES.
en oe tn reo) 6f) “Newton... uu... +... 1878
Dryden BEN eg ave! ane. EORG Pie ADDIS... 6d. 222. son, LEGT
fHarly Rivers ... ... ... 1892 PONCE. re uae: eae ens, LOLS
SeeetnOlgs ... .-. ... .... 1869 {Victoria ... 1861
Samed Napier ... ... ..- 1877 (All raised by Rivers. ) .
PEACHES.
yAlexander (Early Ameri- ) eis Carly a> Ss = “a Fe “ .
878 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
improvements, while the Dalmeny and Albert Sprouts, offered —
about 1858-59, had but a short-lived reputation. |
A dwarf type, originating on the Continent and covered with
close, firm buttons, has of late years given excellent results, the -
best strain being the Dwarf Gem. As is well known, the sport-
ing teudency of the Brassicas is responsible for some very
peculiar forms, and it is, I think, not at all unlikely that a
Brussels Sprout with red buttons may eventually have a place
amongst our favourite vegetables.
BroccoLi
were represented in the earlier days by the Capes, Grange’s
Autumn, Portsmouth, Sulphur, Dwarf Russian, Purple Sprout-
ing, and Knight’s Protecting. In 1843 the popular Snow’s
Winter White was introduced ; and although various and inferior
strains have since been offered under this name, it is safe to say
that in many cases the seed now sold is altogether superior to
the original type. The following year Walcheren, which, per-.
haps, should be classed among the Cauliflowers, was brought to
notice, and has done good service. After this came Adams’
Early, Wilcove Late White, Dilcock’s Bride, and White Sprout-
ing. In later years Broccoli with white heads of closer and
whiter texture have appeared, including Leamington (still one of
the best), Perfection, and Late Queen. Great improvements
have been made in Purple Sprouting Broccoli by selection, and
t is now possible to grow three distinct types, the earliest of
which is available for use at Christmas, the ordinary type
following, and, lastly, a late selection of more compact growth
and better coloured sprouts. The hardiness of these strains igs
an important feature, and their popularity must continue.
In the late Broccoli it has been difficult to retain lateness
without in some degree sacrificing colour and quality, but I am
pleased to note that a late Broccoli which continues good in
quality longer than any variety with which I am acquainted, and
with heads in every way equal to an autumn Cauliflower, is
already in existence, and will certainly become deservedly
popular. By these late, as well as the extra early, selections
there is now no difficulty in having a succession of good Broccoli
and Cauliflower throughout the year.
’
Fie. 97.—Broccoxtr ‘Supers Earnty Wurtre
3880 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
CAULIFLOWERS
are scarcely to be surpassed for delicacy of flavour when pro-
perly cooked. Three types were grown in 1837, the Early,
Late, and Asiatic. These were followed by the Stadtholder,
Walcheren, Snowball, Erfurt, and Veitch’s Autumn Giant. As
Cauliflower seed can seldom be successfully grown in England,
we are, of course, indebted chiefly to Dutch, German, and
Italian specialists for most of the improvements made, and
with the finest types of the Dwarf Erfurt section, such as
Snowball and First Crop, at one end, and the early and late
selections of the Italian Giant varieties at the other, we can
extend the supply over a very much longer period than was
possible sixty years ago. A head of Cauliflower, 36 to 38 inches
in circumference, of perfect quality was a thing unheard of in
1837, but it is by no means uncommon to-day.
KALES.
The great diversity in colour and form of this section of the
Brassicas at the present day would surprise any gardener who
knew only the few varieties existing at the commencement of
the Victorian era. The hardiness of this useful vegetable has
always been its most important feature, and it is to be hoped
that the newer selections will retain this essential characteristic.
During the fifties Mr. Turner introduced the hardy and
most useful Cottager’s Kale, and it appears to increase in favour.
Mention must also be made of the Variegated Kale, a highly
ornamental plant as well as useful for cooking purposes. In
mid-winter the charming colours of the leaves render them
invaluable for decorative purposes.
THE CELERIES OF 1837
were the Italian, Red and White Solid, and Turnip-rooted ; and
although there are now many superior varieties, Celeries vary so
little in character that there is less scope for great improvement
than in many other vegetables. Much, however, has been done —
in improving the solidity and flavour, and amongst the reds
may be noted Clayworth Prize, A 1, Standard Bearer, Sulham
Prize, and Leicester Red, with Solid White and Wright’s Grove
White as the best of the white section. Probably the most dis-
VEGETABLE CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 88]
tinct variety of English origin is White Gem, a small early
Celery of great value.
Attempts have been made to popularise the Continental self-
blanching varieties, but although they may be useful for soups
they are practically of no value where tender, fine-flavoured
Celery is prized ; for, except in appearance, they differ but little
from unblanched English Celeries.
CARROT.
In Carrots the progress made has been very marked indeed
during the period under review. Although there were several
varieties grown in the early years of the Queen’s reign, they
were either very long, such as Altringham and Surrey, or of the
horn section. Improvements on some of these quickly appeared,
James’s Scarlet Intermediate at once meeting with approval, and
for market purposes it will doubtless long continue to be grown.
Our French neighbours are adepts at the improvement of the
Carrot, and the English trade is indebted to them in this respect
to a larger extent perhaps than in any other vegetable. The
French Forcing Horn and Nantes have met with warm approval,
the finest types of the latter being particularly free from the
objectionable yellow core existing in most varieties. It is only
necessary to refer to the magnificent specimens of New Inter-
mediate and Early Gem, and similar varieties which are so
frequently seen on the Exhibition table, for evidence of the great
improvement which has been made in this popular vegetable.
THE CUCUMBER
Was represented by numerous varieties at the time of the
accession of the Queen, chief among them being Early Frame
and White and Black Spine, besides the so-called Long Prickly
and Short Prickly Ridge Cucumbers. Snow, Cuthill, Mills, and
Constantine were among the earliest improvers of this popular
vegetable, and by 1842 many varieties were available.
Kelway’s Victory and Phenomenon, Sion House and Victory
of Bath, appeared during the fifties, and a few years later
Berkshire Champion and Manchester Prize. It was then that
Thomas Lockie took the Cucumber in hand, and Blue Gown
(and its sport Tender and True), Royal Windsor, and the
deservedly popular Lockie’s Perfection were the leading varieties
raised by him. Meanwhile others, including Telegraph and
882 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Cardiff Castle, obtained a leading place, and it will be a long
time before Telegraph is superseded for general cultivation.
I have not inquired from the Messrs. Rochford how many
years the Rochford Cucumber has been in their family, but it is
probably more sought after by growers for market than any
other variety. In recent years the palm for raising improved
varieties must certainly be given to Mr. Mortimer, whose
wonderful exhibits at the Society’s meetings and elsewhere have
been greatly admired. Sutton’s Al, Peerless, Progress, and
Matchless are results of his painstaking work.
Notwithstanding the almost endless varieties now procurable,
it is generally admitted that none of them supply the ideal type
required for cultivation on a large scale. For productiveness
none equals the best strain of Telegraph, but its somewhat pale
colour, especially when the plants are bearing a heavy crop,
lessens its value for market purposes ; and if the Council of the
Royal Horticultural Society should see their way to undertake a
series of trials at Chiswick I would gladly offer a prize of £5. 5s.
for the seedling Cucumber, raised since 1896, which shall com-
bine the productiveness and excellent form of Telegraph with
the dark colour of Rochford’s Cucumber.
Tur LEEK
in 1837 was represented in this country by the Common and
Flag types, although it is on record that in the previous year
four Scotch Leeks were produced in Edinburgh with a circum-
ference of 9 inches or more. A Scotch gardener now living
informs me that although he came to England in 1854 it was
several years before he saw Leeks grown here. The Mussel-
burgh was one of the first improved forms, followed by Ayton
Castle and Henry’s Prize. The greatest triumph, however, is
found in The Lyon and the better selections of this good variety,
such as Prizetaker, appear to present as perfect a form of Leek
as it is possible to obtain or desire.
In this connection may be mentioned the excellent work
done by the Messrs. Dobbie, who have introduced one or two
very fine selections of Leek as well as of several other vegetables.
LETTUCE.
The number of varieties, both Cos and Cabbage, has wonder-
fully increased during the past twenty years, and they embrace
many types and shades of colour.
Fie. 98.—Merton ‘Royat Favourite.’
VEGETABLE CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 383
In 18387 several of the leading varieties of the present day
were in use, including, amongst the Cabbage varieties, Brown
Dutch, Brown and White Silesian, Drumhead, Grand Admiral,
Hammersmith, and one or two others; and in the Cos, White
seeded and Black-seeded Bath, Florence Green, White, and
Spotted.
By 1842 Paris White and Green were announced, and the
various selections of this type are amongst the best Cos Lettuces
at the present time. More recently a very large form of great
excellence, named Mammoth Cos, has appeared and is very
popular. White Heart, intermediate in colour between Paris
White and Green, deserves a place as a popular introduction of
recent years. With regard to Cabbage Lettuce the number of
varieties now available is extraordinary. All the Year Round
was amongst the first improvements, and so good is it that it
has been honoured with several distinctive names. Wheeler’s
Tom Thumb, Veitch’s Perfect Gem, Standwell Green, and
others are excellent varieties largely grown, while more recently
Commodore Nutt, Favourite, and Daniel’s Continuity are
improved types of great merit, the two latter standing longer
than any other without running to seed.
Recently my house has introduced the Intermediate—a
variety resulting from a cross between the Cabbage and Cos
Lettuce, which is highly prized by many.
THE MELON
has advanced during the past sixty years by leaps and bounds.
livery year witnesses the advent of new varieties, and the Fruit
Committee of the Royal Horticultural Society can testify to the
constant succession of aspirants for honours.
In 1837 gardeners depended upon the Cantaloup, Scarlet-
fleshed, Green-fleshed, Lord Sondes, and Queen Anne’s Pocket.
In 1842 Windsor Prize Green and one or two scarlet-fleshed fruits
were distributed. Ten years Jater Beechwood, Bromham Hall,
Victory of Bath, and other standard varieties were grown,
followed at short intervals by Scarlet Gem, Blenheim Orange,
Hybrid, Cashmere, Imperial Green, and Hero of Lockinge, the
latter still retaining the first place as the best Melon for frames,
So easy is its culture that it has acquired the reputation of being
essentially the amateur’s Melon.
ai
In connection with improvement in Melons much good work
has been done by Mr. Owen Thomas, of the Royal Gardens; Mr.
Wythes, of Sion House; Mr. Chas. Ross, and many others. In
1894 we introduced a handsome white-fleshed variety raised by
Mr. Thomas named Royal Favourite (fig. 98), and other note-
worthy Melons have also emanated from the Frogmore Gardens.
VEGETABLE CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 885
ONIONS.
were represented sixty years ago by Blood Red, Deptford, Silver-
skinned, Globe, James’s Keeping, Lisbon, White and Brown
Spanish, Portugal, and some of the Tripoli varieties. While
most of the types have undergone more or less improvement,
special attention has been given to the Spanish class. The
Reading was a valuable selection, and it was followed by Im-
proved Banbury, named after a town which has long been noted
for its Onions. The late Mr. Deverill, of that place, introduced
many fine types, such as Rousham Park, The Wroxton, Anglo-
Spanish, and others. Banbury Cross, a comparatively recent
introduction of fine quality, also came from the same town.
The justly celebrated Ailsa Craig (with Cranston’s Excelsior,
a very similar Onion) has caused quite a revolution in this vege-
table. One celebrated grower in 1896 exhibited twelve specimens
weighing no less than 374, lbs.—an enormous weight for this
country, which would have startled the growers of the olden
days, who had to be content with small specimens weighing
a few ounces each.
Until quite recently it had not been possible to obtain seed of
the fine Spanish Onions of the grocers’ shops; and although
specimens grown in this country are not often so large as im-
ported bulbs, some very fine Onions can be grown by sowing the
seed in heat in January and transplanting in April.
THE PARSNIP
has certainly been much improved since the Guernsey and Hollow
Crown were the only available forms, although no very great
increase in the number of varieties can be reported.
As late as 1852 the only parsnip quoted in a leading seed list
was Hollow Crown. The Student, obtained by the late Professor
Buckman, by continual selection from the wild Parsnip, and
distributed in 1860, is still regarded as a popular variety, and
386 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
has been singularly successful at Shows. Quality in a Parsnip
is almost entirely a matter of selection, and in that way the fine
types now in cultivation have been obtained. Carter’s Maltese
marked a distinct advance and is still widely grown. Quite
recently at the Reading Show, where the general opinion was
that so extensive and fine a collection of vegetables was never
before staged in competition, some of the collections contained
remarkable specimens of a new variety called Tender and True.
This is certainly distinct from other varieties, and possesses
quality which has not hitherto been reached in this vegetable.
SPINACH.
No great advance was made in this vegetable until a few
years ago, when the Victoria and other similar strains were intro-
duced. It is true that many varieties bearing Continental
names have been grown, some standing rather longer than
others before running to seed, but the difference was only slight.
With the advent of the Victoria, however, the duration of the
crop was greatly prolonged, and still more recently this variety
has been surpassed, and we now have both in the round and
prickly seeded sections strains of Spinach which remain good for
weeks after others have gone to seed.
Time will not permit of my referring to Parsley, Rhubarb,
Vegetable Marrow, and some other vegetables, and I must pass
on to
THE ToMATo,
which has increased in popularity to a greater extent and more
rapidly than any other vegetable referred to in this paper.
A proof that it was not much cultivated in the early years of
Her Majesty’s reign is shown by the fact that in a wholesale
seed list published in 1852 the only Tomato mentioned is the
common Red. It is within the last quarter of a century that
such an enormous impetus has been given to the growth of
Tomatos, in consequence of the more cultivated taste of the
masses of the people, and it is now found in almost every
garden, from the cottager’s upwards. ‘The Queen’s gardener
(Mr. Thomas) has identified himself with its improvement,
and Frogmore Selected is one of the best varieties grown at the
present day.
ie ee
;
;
:
7
;
‘
VEGETABLE CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 387
The introduction of the Perfection type was the prelude to
that of many others, and now the number is legion. New selec-
e
poe ee es Gc
a Pp, ‘)
oar
Fic. 100.—Turnie ‘ SNOWBALL.’
tions are plentiful enough, as is proved by our own trials of over
200 groups this year.
888 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To mention in detail anything like the whole of the varieties
which deserve notice would take up too much time, but for
earliest out-door use Conqueror, Earliest of All, Conference, and
Early Ruby are popular varieties. Fine, shapely fruits and plenty
of them are produced by Ifield Gem, Eclipse, Best of All, Duke
of York, and Ham Green Favourite, and in yellow varieties Golden
Nugget as a small fruited variety, and Golden Queen may be
relied on to ripen early and produce good crops.
Mention must also be made of the very excellent golden
yellow or Orange Tomato, called Golden Jubilee, raised by Mr.
Thomas, which forms a striking feature in the Royal trophy at
this exhibition.
Strange developments, in which the fruit partakes of the
character of the Peach, are observed in certain forms, and the
crossing of the Peach Tomato with Perfection has resulted in
some charming types.
With white, yellow, orange, pink, ruby, and scarlet varieties,
not to mention the varying sizes and shapes, there is a wide
choice for the most fastidious, both as regards external appear-
ance and flavour.
GARDEN TURNIP.
A brief reference must be made to the Garden Turnip. In
the early days of Her Majesty’s reign as many yellow as white
varieties were offered, although the demand for the former has -
certainly not increased in proportion to that for the white
fleshed ones.
Amongst the many improvements may be noticed Veitch’s
Red Globe, Snowball (fig. 100), Dobbie’s Model, and Golden Ball,
while the Red and White Milans are varieties arriving at maturity
quicker than any others. These should not be confused with
their prototypes the Red and White Strap-leaved, which have
almost had their day.
Of the varieties imported from the Continent, apart from the
Milans, much selection and improvement has been necessary to
make them worthy of a place in English gardens.
PoTATos.
It will obviously be impossible for me, at the close of this
lengthy paper, to attempt to describe at all adequately the
VEGETABLE CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 889
improvements effected in the Potato during Her Majesty’s
reign, and as I have already in my paper on “Potatos”
(published in vol. xix. of the Journal of the Royal Horticultural
Society) dealt somewhat fully with this subject, I must content
myself now with the fewest possible remarks. As long ago as
1836 Messrs. Peter Lawson & Sons published a descriptive list
of 146 varieties, and amongst some forty-five of the principal of
these I only find one which is still widely grown, viz. the Early
Ashleaf. There are other familiar names such as Early Shaw
and Dons, but the remainder must have passed out of cultivation
at least twenty-five years ago.
In 1852 the old Walnut-leaf Kidney, Early Oxford, Forty-
fold, and York Regent were grown—all varieties of real merit in
their day—but now seldom met with. That excellent Potato
Paterson’s Victoria was widely cultivated up till 1880, but it
would be difficult now to find an acre of it true toname. The
fact that almost all these have disappeared from sight does not
of itself necessarily prove that they were worthless or even
inferior to others grown at the present time ; for it is generally
admitted that the majority of Potatos will not maintain their
full vigour of growth and constitution beyond a certain time, the
limit varying with each individual variety. This is not to be
wondered at when we remember that each year’s growth is but
the prolongation of the life of the plant, which apparently had
completed its work when the haulm died the preceding autumn.
At the same time I have no doubt whatever that even if we
could reproduce such old favourites as the Regent, Paterson’s
Victoria, &c., in all their former excellence, and plant them by
the side of the best Potatos of to-day we should find that very
great progress had been made, not merely in productiveness and
power of withstanding disease, but also in flavour—a point in
which the older varieties are often supposed to have excelled.
We now have in Ringleader, A1, Karly Puritan, &c., first-early
forms which are ready for use long before the so-called early
Potatos of twenty-five years ago; we have also several second-
earlies,as Beauty of Hebron, Supreme, Karly Regent, and Windsor
Castle (fig. 101), which certainly were not equalled by any of the
older varieties in their own section. Whether these will still
retain their good qualities unimpaired twenty-five or fifty years
hence no one can say, though in all probability—as they them-
890 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
selves are instances of the survival of the fittest, in so far that
they were chosen from thousands of less promising seedlings
—several of them will doubtless greatly exceed the limit of age
reached by older varieties.
In the Late and Maincrop section nothing has yet approached
Magnum Bonum in popularity, and it is quite as good now as
when introduced twenty-one years ago. There are many other
varieties of a similar character; but on the closest scrutiny
I have failed to detect any point in which they differ from Mag-
num Bonum, and I have generally found when any difference
Fic. 101.—Poratro ‘Wrypsor CASTLE.’
has been suggested that the varieties in question were not grown
alongside under the same conditions, or else that the seed had
been obtained from different sources, a change of seed often
producing a marked divergence in two rows of the same variety.
I must not leave the subject of Potatos without mentioning
such names as the late James Paterson, Mr. Robert Fenn, the
late James Clark, Mr. Archibald Findlay, Mr. A. Dean, and Mr,
Chas. Ross, all of whom have devoted many years, perhaps the
best years of a lifetime, to the improvement of the noble tuber ;
VEGETABLE CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 891
and to these men the whole horticultural fraternity and the
community at large are greatly indebted.
I have now passed in review all the leading vegetables ; and,
imperfect as this paper has been, I think it will be admitted that
the progress in vegetable cultivation, in its effect on the promo-
tion of health and daily comfort among all classes of the com-
munity, is worthy to rank with the achievements in lighting,
locomotion, and sanitation.
What the progress in the next fifty or sixty years may be no
one can foretell; but on behalf of the seed trade I can only
express the hope that it may be accompanied by a corresponding
decline in the demand for older and inferior forms, for the
labour and anxiety of keeping the rapidly increasing number of
varieties true to name can only be fully appreciated by those
acquainted with the details of seed growing.
DISCUSSION.
Mr. N. N. SHERwoop, V.M.H., said that, having himself
been in the wholesale seed trade for forty years, he had taken
great interest in hearing the paper, and he bore testimony to the
able way in which Mr. Sutton had dealt with the subject. It
might perhaps be asking Mr. Sutton to disclose trade secrets,
but it would have been highly interesting to have known the
difference in the amount of trade done by Mr. Sutton’s firm now
and sixty years ago. Speaking from his own experience, Mr.
Sherwood said he was absolutely astounded at the enormous
demand for seeds which had sprung up during the last sixty
years, and it proved that people not only wanted good vegetables
but plenty of them as well.
Mr. Grorce Bunyarp, V.M.H., said he had been forty-two
years in the retail seed trade, and what struck him most in Mr.
Sutton’s paper was the wonderful way in which he had been
able to recall the names of old varieties which had long since
passed away. With regard to Mr. Sutton’s eulogium of ‘Ne
Plus Ultra’ Pea, Mr. Bunyard thought that in ‘ Alfred the
Great’ we had all the good qualities of ‘Ne Plus Ultra’ com-
bined with a somewhat more vigorous growth and two or three
more Peas in each pod. Mr. Bunyard mentioned, as a curious
example of reversion, that not at all unfrequently with Runner
Beans if white seeds are sown the produce will be of the colour
392 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of the original form before hybridisation, and in the same way
red seeds produce white ones. As a general rule he dis-
countenanced vegetables being too big—overgrown. The true
test of a vegetable lay in the hands of the cook, and the smaller
the vegetable the more likely it was to get cooked right through.
In dealing with Tomatos he noticed that Mr. Sutton had omitted
the ‘ Conference’ Tomato, raised in connection with the Chiswick
Conference some years back. He would like to bear testimony
to the marvellous work done by Messrs. Sutton in regard to the
Potato; but he could not help thinking that one great mistake
had been made in sacrificing, in so very many cases, good
flavour for a big crop. The ‘ Windsor Castle’ was one of
Messrs. Sutton’s triumphs, being one of the finest Potatos ever
srown. They owed a debt of gratitude to the Americans for
introducing ‘Early Rose’ and others; for, taking things all
round, he thought there was no Potato for field or garden culture
equal to the ‘Beauty of Hebron’ and the ‘ Puritan.’ Turning
to another view of the question, Mr. Bunyard spoke of the false
policy of buying cheap vegetable seeds, characterising it as the
greatest folly that could be perpetrated. He constantly saw
vegetable seeds advertised for sale which could not be properly
erown for the money. Very few people had any idea of the
ereat care and attention necessary in making a proper selection,
extending over a number of years. ‘There was a tendency on
the part of all vegetables to revert to some former type, and that
required the greatest care in watching. He would therefore
counsel people not to buy cheap seeds at any price.
Mr. FyFre said that many Peas were sent to Chiswick for
trial without any definition, and he would suggest that in the
next year’s publication of the Royal Horticultural Society
people shold be asked to send in proper descriptions, so that the
Superintendent could have the older varieties grown side by side
with the new.
The CHAIRMAN said there was one tendency at the present
day which ought to be checked, and that was allowing old friends
to appear under different names. At Chiswick, for example,
they had some thirty varieties of Beet sent under different names,
but upon examination there were found to be only five different
varieties. As to new Melons, at least nineteen out of twenty
that came before them were worse than their parents.
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 393
Mr. Sutton, in reply, said much valuable work was done at
Chiswick, but the trials to be of value should be greatly extended.
It would be better to have a Pea trial once every four or five
years, and to do it exhaustively, than to but half do the work
year by year. With regard to the ‘Conference’ Tomato, it was
one of the very finest types grown. As to the Potato, it was
necessary to have a good crop, but they should also be determined
to have the finest quality also.
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 2.
The Chair was taken at 3 p.m. by William Marshall, Esq.,
member of Council, who called upon Mr. J. Assbee, who read the
following paper :—
THE PROGRESS OF MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION
DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN.
By Mr. J. AssBez, F.R.H.S.
The memorable year of Jubilee, now drawing to its close, has
led to many useful and interesting comparisons between the exist-
ing state of things and those of sixty years ago. And this annual
gathering of the Royal Horticultural Society within this famous
Gardeners’ Palace seems a most suitable opportunity for reviewing
gardeners’ work, and it is my pleasing duty to endeavour to show
to what extent market gardeners—that is, those engaged in
cultivating vegetables, fruits, and flowers for market supply—are
progressing and keeping pace with the times in which we live.
Let us take a brief survey of the origin and growth of the
market gardener, the necessities which caused his existence, and
the important position he fills in supplying our daily wants.
Originally we may suppose every man to have been his own
gardener; but as the world became more thickly peopled, and
communities became established, towns sprang into existence,
and with these market gardeners. In small towns even to the
present day the wants of those who cannot cultivate garden
produce for themselves are supplied by small local farmers and
gardeners, who bring in on market days such mixed loads of
farm and garden produce as the successive seasons yield, and
housewives largely attend such markets and purchase for them-
selves. In larger communities the public are mainly supplied
G
394 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
by shops, and the shopkeepers buy at markets. The markets
under such‘conditions become specific instead of general, and are
held much more frequently. Hence arose daily markets whereat
only garden produce was dealt with, and thus market gardeners
became a special class of ‘producers.
The great changes brought about by the discovery of steam,
and its application as a motive power, have entirely altered the
conditions of life amongst a large proportion of our working
population. The inventor has produced the manufacturer, who
has caused densely crowded towns full of hungry workers and a
busy middle class to arise as by magic, even in quiet rural
districts, whilst larger towns (especially London) have increased
beyond’conception. This has had a corresponding effect upon
our market gardener. Driven from his original suburban
holdings by the advancing town, he is bound to seek fresh fields
and pastures new. His few acres at Battersea, Chelsea, Fulham,
Hammersmith, Peckham, Deptford, and other near neighbour-
hoods have to be vacated for farms in a wider area, but within
carriage distance, enabling him to attend a market centre.
Nor is this all. For, by a wise dispensation of Providence, the
same motive power which has been so instrumental in causing
mankind to congregate into large centres has also opened up
fresh and more distant fields, both native and foreign, for their
supply. Thus the market gardeners near the great centres of
. consumption are now brought into competition with a more
distant class, who have sprung into existence in localities where
the soil and position are favourable to special productions. In
addition to this there can be no doubt but that the increase in
wealth and purchasing power, accompanied by higher tastes
and improved education, has made greater demands for variety
and higher excellence in our food supply, and an additional
impetus is given in this direction by the dietary prescribed by the
highest medical and sanitary authorities. Thus we are living in
an age which demands infinitely more, both in quantity, quality,
and variety, from our market gardeners.
Letus now turn and see to what extent these public wants are
met. But before going into the question of his productions I
should like to take a snapshot at the typical market gardener
of sixty years ago, of whom a few examples may still be found.
There he stands, possibly on the same stand as his forefathers
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 395
did, selling almost identically similar produce—a sturdy, kindly
personage, with a certain dry humour and considerable indivi-
duality. Both at home and at market you will find him thrifty
and industrious. His business is his study, and well he knows
what to grow, and when and how to grow it. He has no specu-
lation in his character, and he is quite content that others should
test the value of new varieties before he leaves the cultivation of
old and approved favourites. Occasionally, however, he devotes
himself to a special line of vegetable or fruit, and in some cases
has produced valuable and improved varieties. If you care to
converse with him he can recall many happy times of interest in
the past, and can quote you prices for produce which the pur-
chasing public may be glad we are never likely to see again.
Well, if we must lose our respected old friend, let us be thankful
that his place is being so well filled with sons and successors
possessing all the sterling good qualities of the father, and in
addition thereto a superior education, newer and wider ideas of
business, and an energy, perseverance, and skill in production
which have raised our market gardening industry into a position
of the highest national importance.
I propose to take the productions of our present market
gardeners in the following order :—1, Vegetables; 2, Fruits;
3, Flowers ; each of which may also be subdivided into out-of-door
or naturally grown varieties, and in-door or forced varieties.
VEGETABLES—OPEN Grown.
With regard to naturally grown vegetables I may say that
the cultural details of sixty years ago, with very few exceptions,
remain the standard of the highest present perfection. It is in
the direction of earlier and improved varieties, and in the in-
crease in quantities rather than in the methods of culture, that
a comparison will mostly tell. I do not propose to enumerate
the kinds of Vegetables or the varieties which have been succes-
sively cultivated during the period under review, but I propose
rather to touch upon a few marked cases where important
varieties have been introduced, or new and extended fields of
culture have been opened up.
AsparaGus very fitly commences my list, as its cultivation
gives a striking illustration of remarkable progress. Many acres
. a2
396 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of this wholesome spring delicacy have been laid down during
the past few years in places where the soil and situation are
favourable. The so-called “ grass’? has become known by the
locality from which it is produced, such as Worcester Grass,
Cambridge Grass, Sandwich Grass, &¢. Though our local
Middlesex growers still bear the palm for excellence, I may
perhaps be excused if I quote the Worcester or Evesham field as
a sample of progress. About twenty-five years ago certain
gardeners in the Evesham Valley began to grow Asparagus as a
market vegetable. These growers were happily brought into
touch with Covent Garden salesmen, who taught them to pro-
perly grade and pack the bundles for the market trade. The
prices proving remunerative, and the demand largely exceeding
the supply, a considerable development of the industry followed,
and the railway, waking up to the importance of encouraging a
good customer, granted better facilities for transit. It is now
estimated that there are about 4,000 acres of Asparagus in this
district alone. Each acre in full bearing will give 40,000 sticks,
or 400 bundles, of which about two-thirds come to London. —
These figures are a moderate computation, and are small com-
pared with our importations of foreign Grass.
CELERY is another example of extended cultivation. The
increasing value of Celery as a vegetable, either cooked or raw,
has no doubt had a stimulating effect upon its production. In
Lincolnshire many hundred acres are grown for market ; indeed,
it may be regarded as a regular alternative crop with other
market vegetables in the black soil belt of the Trent Valley. It
affords another illustration of the railway system as an artery of
food products, beneficial alike to grower, consumer, and carrier.
As much as fifty tons of celery a day is brought to London
by the Great Northern Railway in the season.
Pras.—The cultivation of this most important summer
vegetable has made great strides, particularly in the Essex
district. Our earliest Peas come from Kent and other southern
counties, and our latest from Yorkshire. The season lasts from
the end of May or beginning of June till August. The
establishment of the Great Eastern Railway Company’s depdét
for Essex garden fruit has more than doubled the tonnage of
Peas brought by them into the London markets, and opened up
a great outlet for other kinds of market produce.
; -
ie MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 397
\
f
;
.
.
Ontons.—The introduction of the Spanish and Tripoli Onion
has had a considerable effect in improving our English varieties.
The market gardener finds a considerable sale for bunched young
Onions during the spring and early summer months. When I
read that over 6,000,000 bushels of Onions, valued at £684,000,
were imported into this country in 1896 we cannot consider that
we are overburdened with our home supply.
Potatos.—These are in every respect the leading vegetable
at present in useamongst us. The small market gardener has
to a very great extent given over the cultivation of this and
certain other vegetables to the farmer-gardener, if I may so
designate those large growers who combine farming with the
production of market crops. ‘There were 563,741 acres of
Potatos grown in Great Britain in 1896. These were estimated
to produce 3,562,235 tons. Out of this quantity Lincolnshire,
our largest Potato-producing county, grew 57,688 acres, produc-
ing 400,709 tons; whilst Yorkshire grew 51,495 acres, yielding
326,849 tons. There does not seem to have been any great
increase in the quantity of Potatos grown recently in this
country. The Great Northern and Midland Railways have
established depdts for the convenience of this trade, and as many
as 1,100 truck loads of Potatos arrived at the Great Northern
depot in one day last season. Great as is our Potato production
there is still a large foreign importation, chiefly of early varieties,
from the Canary Isles, Jersey, and the Mediterranean, as well as
from Holland, the value of which is about £1,000,000 a yedr. No
vegetable has been so prolific of varieties grown as the Potato.
Most of our new ones only last a few years, to be in turn
superseded by so-called improvements supposed to possess better
qualities. The great object of the Potato raiser is to secure
(1) a plentiful cropper ; (2) a good eater; (8) a disease resister-
Of late years the system of spraying has been introduced to
accomplish the latter object.
Broccoui and CAULIFLOWER have been greatly improved and
their period of growth extended chiefly by the introduction of
Veitch’s Autumn Giant, which was a grand example of a new
variety fulfilling a decided trade want. Cauliflower and Broccoli
might also be quoted as examples of the distance vegetables can
be carried for market. Our remotest English county, Corn-
wall, supplies us with many thousands of crates of these useful
898 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
vegetables, often in seasons when nearer fields have perished
with the frost. I might mention incidentally that we have also
of late years imported Cauliflower largely from Italy.
FORCED VEGETABLES.
Besides the efforts that have been made to improve and |
extend naturally grown vegetables, our more advanced market
gardeners are turning their attention largely to forced goods.
The earlier climatic conditions on the other side of the
English Channel, together with the increased facilities for
transit of produce, have enabled the French competitor to secure
great advantages over the English grower in the market for early
spring salads and vegetables. Efforts are being made to mini-
mise this by forcing certain vegetables in England, though up to
the present the success has not been very marked. There are,
however, a few things being very successfully done, and this may
lead to more serious attempts in other directions.
RuvuBARB.—The present system of forcing Rhubarb is a most
marked advance on the old methods. There is a popular notion
that the forced Rhubarb, so abundantly supplied to the London
market from the Leeds district of Yorkshire, is in some mys-
terlous way produced by waste factory steam. This is merely a
humorous fable, as a visit to one of our local growers who are
adopting its cultivation will clearly testify. A field of Rhubarb
is first cultivated in the ordinary way. Large sheds, usually
100 ft. long, 30 ft. wide, 5 ft. high at the eaves, and 8 ft. high in
the centre, are erected at a convenient spot, generally in the field
or closely adjacent. These sheds are perfectly dark when closed;
and the Rhubarb roots are lifted from the open ground and
placed very thickly in these sheds, which are artificially heated
and kept at the proper temperature and moisture. The Rhubarb
is periodically pulled, bunched, and packed for market, and when
the forcing season is over the roots can be removed and returned
to the open ground for recuperation and future use. A shed of
the size named will hold about an acre of Rhubarb, and the
varieties grown are chiefly Champagne and Victoria. The season
during which it is marketed extends from the latter end of
January to May. In the height of the season—February and
March—it is estimated that over thirty tons a day are brought
into London alone.
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 399
Sea Kate anp Asparacus.—These are now forced upon a
new and greatly improved system, though the old practice of
forcing Sea Kale is still being worked. By means of a subter-
ranean chamber containing a hot pipe passing through an open
water channel, the roots are supplied with a warm and humid
bottom heat. Well-matured roots, raised in the open ground,
are lifted and placed very thickly over this chamber in frames
and protected from the outer air and light by suitable covering ;
and when the shoots are matured a delightfully clean blanched
vegetable well rewards the grower for all his previous care and
pains.
I may add that this system has been introduced by one of
our most typical and enterprising market gardeners. With
regard to Sea Kale, the bed will produce abundant sets for future
out-of-door culture, yielding in time a further supply. With
Asparagus, however, forced roots are of no further use. In all
systems of forcing vegetables by packing such as I have described,
a quantity of adjoming farm land is necessary to keep up a
supply of well-grown roots.
MusHrooms.—The old system of forcing Mushrooms on
triangular beds of manure with a straw protection is still largely
followed. The attempts to force them in houses or sheds have
met with very varying success. When well grown on the latter
system they have a more attractive appearance; but to grow
mushrooms successfully in a house requires constant watchful
supervision, and experience often gained after much expense and
comparative failure.
SALADS.—In the direction of forced salads and vegetables
there is a large field for enterprise still open. Except Mustard
and Cress, which are well and largely grown, and a few French
Beans we are almost entirely in the hands of French growers for
our early supply. Ilook hopefully to the time when cheaper agri-
cultural glass-houses and frames shall enable British growers to
compete successfully with foreign and Channel Island producers.
At present English market gardeners find a more profitable use
for frames by raising seeds in them and forwarding early out-of-
door crops. Asa rule vegetables thus assisted fetch much higher
prices than later ones.
400 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
FRUITS—Open Grown.
These are either orchard fruits or market garden fruits.
The system of planting a mixed garden of top and bottom* fruits
is generally followed. The bushes below can be removed later on,
when the top fruits have grown sufficiently to cover the ground,
and thus the garden be turned into an orchard ; or the mixed
garden can still be retained by thinning out some of the tall
trees.
The bush system of culture does not admit of this dual
arrangement after a few years.
There has been a great extension of fruit cultivation for
market during the Victorian era, and particularly during the last
half of it. During the last decade the acreage of fruit land has
increased from 86,724 acres to 76,245 acres, of which 32,090
acres are orchards and 30,699 acres are market gardens.
Besides this fruit land there are 96,696 acres of market gardens
in Great Britain. I find that Kent is par excellence the greatest
fruit and market garden county, and well deserves its title ‘ the
Garden of England.’ The leading market gardening counties
are :—
Acres of Acres of
Fruit. Market Gardens,
Kent. : : ; : d . 22,632 12,972
Middlesex . A , ; ; :. B70 9,460
Worcester . : : . : . 38,194 6,139
Norfolk . : : : ‘ . 2,943 2,834
Yorkshire . , . : : . 8,691 5,124
Hampshire : : t F . 2,149 3,145
Essex : : : : : . 1,929 4,642
Cambridge. : ; y : ~ Oo Tae 2,125
Surrey f ; ‘ , : . 1,459 3.700
Sussex. ; ‘ , : . 1,480 2,443
Lincoln . : ' F " . 1,698 1,582
Bedford . ; ; : ; : 264 7,997
Gloucester : . : : . Snao 2,277
Devon : : : ‘ A . 1;5338 1,613
Cornwall . ; e : , . 1,948 2,101
Lanark (Scotland) . é 2,107 1,754
(Bd. Ag. Ret.” 1896.)
Respecting particular varieties of fruit grown for market
there has been no doubt a greater improvement than in vege-
tables. The market gardeners are very largely the producers of
their own seed in vegetables. In fruit they are more open to
the introduction of new varieties from professional nurserymen,
* Top and bottom, i.e. standard trees with bushes planted between
them.
{
| oe ewe EE eee ~~ er
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 401
especially so in new plantations, of which there have recently
been so many. There are, however, cases where the possession
of good varieties of market fruit have caused some of our market
gardeners to raise their own stock, and occasionally to compete
with nurserymen. Foreign competition in certain fruits has, of
course, a considerable effect in determining the varieties produced
by the home grower. The public taste, too, is another matter of
consideration, especially in the introduction of new varieties.
The main points to be studied in a new market plantation are
(1) quantity or productiveness; (2) quality and appearance;
(8) time at which it can be marketed.
AppLes.—Here the market gardener of to-day is brought
face to face with the American producer. Consequently he must
grow either—
(a) Early varieties to clear before the American crop arrives,
such as Keswick Codlin, Lord Suffield, Lord Grosvenor,
Devonshire Quarrenden, Yellow Ingestrie, Duchess’ Favourite,
Pearmain, Duchess of Oldenburg, Ecklinville, &c.; or
(6) Middle season apples of such well-known and favourite
varieties that they are always saleable at good prices, despite all
competition, such as King of the Pippins, Blenheim Orange,
Cox’s Orange, Ribston, &c.; or
(c) Late varieties, which can be kept till the bulk of the
American crop is over, such as Bramley’s Seedling, Lane’s
Prince Albert, Northern Greening, Wellington, &c.
Prars.—Pears, like Apples, have greatly improved in variety,
though only a few are grown in abundance for market work.
Williams’ Bon Chrétien is amongst Pears what Blenheim Orange
is amongst Apples, and what Victoria is amongst Plums—
undoubted favourite. The Hessel is largely grown as a sure
cropper. Amongst other varieties I might mention Louise
Bonne of Jersey, Marie Louise, Pitmaston Duchess, Calabasse,
Fertility, Beurré Diel, Duchesse d’Angouléme, Seckle, Winter
Nelis, and Catillac.as being chiefly grown.
Puums have had many additions of late years, the chief
favourite being appropriately named Victoria. Rivers’ Early
Prolific is a very valuable market Plum. Other varieties, such
as Orleans, Prince of Wales, Green Gages, The Czar, Monarch,
Diamond, Pond’s Seedling, Gisborne’s, Coe’s Golden Drop, and
Pershore, are largely grown. Plums from France are over before
402 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
our home-grown ones are ready, and the Dutch have not the
quality of our English fruit.
CHERRIES are largely grown, particularly in Kent, where the
cherry orchards are usually sold as a crop season by season.
The chief market varieties are May Dukes, Eltons, Bigarreaus,
and Morellos. The grower of Plums and Cherries has an object
in securing early varieties, and with Plums late ones also, so as
to avoid a glut as much as possible by lengthening the period
for marketing.
Sorr Fruits.—Strawberries, Raspberries, Currants, and
Gooseberries. Of these, Strawberries come first in area and
extent of cultivation. They vary much with the soil and situa-
tion, and are more subject to change of variety. The Cornish
and Southampton fields have done much to drive French Straw-
berries out of the market, and the South-Western and Great
Western Railways are assisting distant fruit growers. For
flavour there is none equal to the British Queen, but its cultiva-
tion is more difficult. Paxton is by far the most largely grown
market variety. President is a very useful old variety. Napier
is too soft, and so is Noble, which, though of good size and pro-
lific, lacks quality as a market fruit. Eleanor is late and sharp-
flavoured. Royal Sovereign is perhaps the best of the newer
varieties.
Bush fruits, as they are called, are very much more largely
grown than formerly.
GOOSEBERRIES have a double advantage, there being a great
demand for them in their green and unripened stage. Lads,
Bobs, Warringtons, Industry, Ringer, and Rifleman are the chief
market varieties.
CurRANTS, both red, black, and white, could with advantage
be even more largely grown. They doubtless suffer somewhat
from being often an undercrop.
RASPBERRIES are usually grown in the open field. They are
a difficult fruit to handle except in tubs, and more Raspberries
in proportion go to the jam factory than to market.
In some fruit districts local jam factories have been erected
to deal with such surplus as cannot be more advantageously
disposed of, particularly districts far from large towns, such as
some parts of Kent, Worcestershire, Cambridgeshire, Gloucester-
shire, &c.
4
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 403
Besides our home-raised fruits there are enormous quantities
of foreign imported fruits. In 1896 we received no less than
6,177,193 bushels of Apples from abroad, valued at £1,582,471 ;
483,823 bushels of Pears, valued at £206,674; 560,246 bushels
of Plums, valued at £241,782; and 219,867 bushels of Cherries,
valued at £105,246; anda total of 18,641,874 bushels of raw
fruit, valued at £5,540,069, being an increase of £2,200,000
since 1871. With such facts before us can we wonder that
English open-ground fruit culture is on the increase? Could
we but depend with any certainty on our climate, I should say it
was a great national waste that so much money should go out of
the country to pay for what might profitably be grown within it.
But unfortunately the English fruit crop is very uncertain, and
many who might profitably engage in the business have not
sufficient faith to inspire them with courage to make the attempt,
or have not sufficient means to enable them to await the successful
return for their outlay. Many instances could be cited of large
returns in one year being followed by almost nothing another,
and only by a system of averages can the value of a fruit farm
be gauged. This uncertainty is very much against extended
fruit culture.
The latest competitor with the home fruit grower has been
California, the climate of which country seems most admirably
adapted for choice high-class fruits. Mr. A. Block, of Santa
Clara, is a very extensive fruit producer, and he has induced the
railway and shipping companies to send fruit into London
markets in cool chambers. He has perfected a system of pack-
ing for this purpose, and I have the pleasure of submitting to
you for inspection a case of Doyenné du Comice Pears and a
case of Coe’s Late Red and Golden Drop Plums which started
from California sixteen days ago, and were sold by thousands in
the market by Messrs. Garcia & Jacobs yesterday. The fruit
compares favourably with the choicest noblemen’s gardeners’
productions here to-day, and is an object lesson for English
srowers how to pack and forward to market. One great advan-
tage of foreign fruit in the market is the fact that they are sold
with the case complete, thus avoiding all the vexations and
troubles attaching to returned empties.
404 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
FORCED FRUIT.
The cultivation of forced fruit for market has made enormous
strides during the last twenty-five years. The small and com-
paratively trivial quantities grown in 1837 are now hardly worth
considering. The few Pineapples and Grapes then grown were
obtainable only by the wealthy, Cucumbers were grown in
frames and pits, and Tomatos were unknown as food and
popularly regarded as poisonous. No doubt the high prices
realised by Grapes and Cucumbers led to their more extended
cultivation, and the success attending these efforts, together with
the more natural method of growing Cucumbers pendent, and
the education of the public taste for Tomatosas food, has opened
out the trade beyond all anticipation.
Other fruits forced are Strawberries, Peaches, Nectarines,
Melons, and Figs. The introduction of Madeira Pineapples has
caused their culture for market as an English hot-house crop
to cease.
Many of our large fruit growers under glass also grow flowers,
and by a judicious system of management reap considerable
advantage from a succession of crops. As a rule, the most
successful men engaged in this business have grown up in it.
Having satisfied themselves of the soundness of its commercial
character, they have applied their acquired experience in the
practical details of their work to its extension. The enormously
increased production has had the effect of greatly lowering the
market values, and this has let in as buyers and consumers a
large class, who thus obtain choice fruit at reasonable prices.
This extension of trade has been made profitable by the cheapen-
ing of materials, and the more economic use of them by horti-
cultural builders, and by improved systems in the construction
and heating of greenhouses, and by more effective methods ‘of
carrying on the work ona large scale. Through these means
the grower is enabled to face reduced prices with a fairly satis-_
factory result. One of our largest market gardeners thus sums
matters up :—‘‘I have to invest more capital, to employ more
labour, and to work harder myself for less percentage of profit,
The public reap all the additional advantage.”
In visiting the establishment of any one of the large market
gardeners we cannot but admire the excellent order and regular
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 405
system under which their business is conducted. Hverywhere
are visible the forethought and direction of a master mind, capable
of grasping alike the most trivial details of the work as well as
the highest commercial principles so necessary in organising and
successfully conducting a large and important business.
A circle drawn with a fifteen-mile radius from Covent
Garden will embrace the largest proportion of the market glass.
Perhaps the Lea Valley contains the largest number of growers
under glass. From Tottenham to Rye House there are a series
of establishments which are monuments of progress; if the
North of London be visited we find others in the Finchley
district ; if we journey up the Thames Valley and its outlets we
again meet with many equally deserving, though more often
hidden by the surrounding fruit plantations; the southern
section stretches away to the Bexley and Swanley districts,
where they bear equal evidence of importance as local industries.
Besides this home district there are other neighbourhoods, such
as Worthing, East Grinstead, Chelmsford, and many others,
where colonies of fruit growers under glass are springing up and
extending. In fact, wherever the soil and situation seem favour-
able to the successful development of this business some enter-
prising person seems ready to open it up.
I should particularly like to quote Worthing as a remarkable
illustration of what alocality distant from large centres of con-
sumption can accomplish. It is now about twenty-six years
since the first commencement was made to produce glass-grown
fruit at Worthing. It has now become a local industry of the
highest importance. No fewer than 650 houses of glass are
rated as agricultural land with a ratable value of £8,500 a
year. They produce great quantities of Grapes, Tomatos,
Cucumbers, and flowers; and the united efforts and association
of the growers have literally compelled the railway to grant more
favourable terms for the transit of goods.
I find it impossible to give accurate information respecting
the quantities of goods raised under glass, but so far as I can
judge there are about 1,000 tons of Grapes, 6,000 tons of Tomatos;
and 500,000 dozen of Cucumbers produced in this country at the
present time yearly. Itis estimated that there are 32,000,000
square feet of glass in the United Kingdom used for fruit and
flower culture. This would cover 735 acres of land, and if put
406 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
together end to end in houses, 15 feet wide, would reach a
distance of 400 miles.
Graprs.—The chief varieties of Grapes grown for market are
Black Hambro’, Gros Colmar, Alicante, and Muscat of Alexandria;
and in smaller quantities Madresfield Court, Gros Maroe, and
Canon Hall. |
Tomatos.—The old wrinkled variety has gone quite out of
cultivation, and many growers select their own seed, chiefly from
strains of Chemin Rouge, Perfection, Challenger, and Trophy.
CucumMBERS.—The present system of growing Cucumbers in
quantity has had the effect of almost entirely driving out the
Early Dutch Cucumber from the market ; and when the British
public shall appreciate the value of this fruit as a stewed
vegetable, as well as a raw salad, there will be an additional
‘opening for its culture. Improved varieties for hot-house culture
have followed the introduction of Telegraph and White Spine,
and hybrid varieties raised therefrom now dominate the market.
Many eminent growers are their own seed raisers. Instead of
importing Cucumbers, there is now a considerable export trade
in them to Continental cities. Our Grapes, too, are sent to the
Continent and to America, proving at once the superiority ofour
hot-house fruit.
PEACHES and NECTARINES are grown in certain districts.
Unless high-class fruits at top prices are produced, there does
not appear to be very much profit attached to their culture.
The Peach is especially liable to damage from imperfect packing
and change of temperature, and no fruit shows such a difference
in price between the first and second grades.
STRAWBERRIES under glass are a profitable crop when well
grown, and they can be succeeded by a crop of Tomatos. In
some cases a third crop of Chrysanthemums are grown in the
same house.
FLOWERS—OpeEN GRovunpD.
Large as have been the areas of agricultural land transferred
from the farmer to the market gardener to supply vegetables
and fruits, and great as has been the progress of those grown
under glass, the crowning point of modern gardening is most
certainly shown in the rise and progress of flower culture for
market. There can be no comparison made between 1837 and
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 407
1897 in this branch of market work. The few loads of potted
plants and bunches of flowers only obtainable at Covent Garden
Centre Row, have been changed into the unique and magnificent
spectacle presented by the early Covent Garden Flower Market
of to-day. Nothing so much marks the advance of our working
and middle classes in material progress, in improved taste and
refinement, as their increased outlay upon flowers. At all
seasons and under all conditions of life, from the sick-room in a
London lodging, or the ward of a public hospital, up through all
times of joy and sorrow, to the highest function of society (the
Drawing Room), we find them shedding their joyous light and
delicious perfume, Nature’s most charming productions.
Naturally grown flowers commence with the humble Snow-
drop, passing along with the changing seasons through Violets,
Narcissus, Tulips, Wallflowers, Lilies, Pinks, Stocks, Roses,
Asters, Dahlias, Chrysanthemums, and others, till frost and
snow again appear. In early spring a large quantity of
rooted plants and seedlings suited to suburban and window
gardening are daily sold in pots and boxes. These are succeeded
by bedding-out and window plants, such as Geraniums, Calceo-
larias, Marguerites, &c.
FORCED FLOWERS—Por Pranvs.
But however much we may admire our hardy and half-hardy
bedding friends, whether in the plant or flower, they are eclipsed
by their more delicate brethren of hot-house culture.
Pot plants (as distinct from cut-flowers) are of two classes:
(1) foliage plants and (2) flowering plants.
Fou1aGE Puants have recently become more and more in
demand, especially since our growers have proved that they can
raise them without the assistance of foreign nurserymen. The
Palms, for instance, have so increased in quantity and decreased
in price as to bring them within reach of a multitude of buyers.
The chief foliage plants brought to market are Palms, Ferns,
Crotons, Aspidistras, Aralias, Solanums, &c. A curious fancy
for small boxes of mixed foliage plants in thumb pots has sprung
up of late years, and one firm alone sells about two and a half
millions of these pots annually.
FLOWERING PLANTS in pots give general evidence of excel-
lence of cultivation and magnificent training. They change
408 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
with the season much more than foliage plants do. The succes-
sion runs through Tulips, Hyacinths, Primulas, Cyclamen,
Cinerarias, Spirea, Deutzia, Musks, Mignonette, Marguerites,
Heliotropes, Fuchsias, Calceolarias, Pelargoniums, Lilies, Ivy
and other Geraniums, Heaths, Roses, Chrysanthemums, and
many others. Some have a longer period than others, but all
present in turn masses of colour, supremely grand at all seasons.
The grower of plants for market is subject to fashionable
caprice more than any other producer. Many flowers for almost
unaccountable reasons have a run for a few seasons and then get
somewhat discarded for newer favourites. As it takes some
time to raise a stock of any newly fancied variety, this artificial
rise and fall in value is very disheartening to growers. A faint
idea of the extent of this important branch of market work may
be gathered from the advertisement columns of the gardening
press, where sales of hundreds of thousands of leading market
varieties of young stock are quoted. In addition to the millions
of pots brought into London, there is a very large trade carried
on between the growers’ places and distant centres of population,
many thousand boxes being thus sent direct by rail every year.
CuT-FLOWERS.
Besides the enormous quantity of flowers and plants in pots
grown for the market, there has sprung up of late years an
increasing trade in cut-blooms. In point of fact, many growers
are beginning to divert their attention from Plants to Cut-flowers,
as entailing less work and expense with more certain sale. In
this department, however, the local grower has to enter into
competition, not only with the surplus cut-blooms of private
growers and gentlemen’s gardeners, but with more distant
English market growers, who can send supplies of cut-blooms
readily by rail, and also with the foreign producer, favoured with
cheap rates and a more genial climate. From the Riviera, for
instance, we have daily hundreds of baskets during the winter
and spring months, and this trade is largely increasing. Doubt-
ss there are times when this competing French flower trade
has a considerable effect in cheapening certain classes of English
goods. The choicest freshly cut home-grown flowers, however,
secure the best class of trade, and in this as in fruit the English
grower stands unrivalled.
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 409
As an instance of the remarkable effect of opening up a
market with a remote locality I cannot but quote the Narcissus
trade of the Scilly Islands. This was introduced by T. Algernon
Dorrien Smith, Esq., of Tresco Abbey, who sent the first lot of
flowers to Covent Garden in 1865, when they realised £1. Under
this gentleman’s fostering care and untiring efforts the export
in 1885 had risen to sixty-five tons of flowers; in 1887 it had
increased to 100 tons, and in 1896 to 496 tons of Narcissus and
fifty-nine tons of Wallflowers and Tomatos. The largest day
on record was this year, when 1,600 boxes came to London alone.
The Narcissus as a market flower affords a remarkable
example of the way in which a popular favourite rapidly develops.
Perhaps this is due, not only to its innate beauty as a flower, but
to the time of year when it blooms, to its good keeping pro-
perties when properly gathered, and to the admirable and effec-
tive method of bunching for market. Great credit is due to
those growers who so successfully introduced this popular
flower.
The chief cut-blooms for market are Lilies of the Valley,
Roses, Carnations, Scarlet Geraniums, Tuberoses, Arums,
Camellias, Gardenias, EKucharis, Orchids, Chrysanthemums, &c.
The great feature in connection with blooms is to secure a regular
and constant supply. Of course this is impossible in certain
cases, but there are others where it is done. These constant daily
friends and old-established favourites are always in demand, par-
ticularly white and self-coloured varieties, and consequently are
less subject to glut and its attendant evils. 1 might just add
that one of our latest developments has been to keep Lily-of-the-
Valley roots in cool chambers, so that they may be grown all the
year round. It is impossible to give any statistics as to the
quantity of cut-flowers or of the many thousands engaged in the
trade as growers and sellers.
~ We have now reviewed the market gardener as a producer in
all branches of his business, and shown the marvellous progress
he has made, particularly during the last two decades. We have
seen how he has extended the area of production in suitable
districts, both near to and remote from the large centres of
human life. We have seen how he has increased the variety and
improved the quality of our food supply, and has added much to
H
410 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the pleasures of life, as well as greatly cheapening both its neces-
saries and its luxuries—and this in spite of enormous and in-
creasing competition, both foreign and colonial. As a class the
market gardeners of to-day may claim a high and meritorious
standing amongst their fellow citizens, benefiting alike them-
selves, their employés, the many trades allied to their business,
and last, but not least, the public generally. That the industry
will still further advance there can be no doubt, and froma
public point of view this is most desirable; but I would wish to
add a word of caution in this respect.
The agricultural crisis through which we are still passing
has been not only due to the decrease in the value of produce
trought about by enormous foreign importations, but it was also
partly caused by the fictitious value attached to farms through
the competition of retired mercantile men and other capitalists,
who regarded farming as a healthy, profitable, and a pleasurable
investment for capital. I have seen signs of a similar feeling
with reference to market gardening, and particularly to cultiva-
tion under glass, and though I still believe there is room for
further judicious extension by competent practical men, I feel it
a duty to advise a cautious policy, and, above all, a thorough
business acquaintance with the details of this work, before rashly
venturing upon outlay which may bring trouble and loss, instead
of pleasure and profit.
I have seen at the Victoria Era Exhibition some very inter-
esting illustrated comparisons showing the differences between
things as they exist to-day and as they were sixty years ago.
I regret I have no diagram of this description to offer you, but I
am much indebted to Mr. Tucker for some very excellent en-
larged photographs of a few of the best of his many horticultural
erections for market garden produce, which will give you a better
notion of the progress the trade has made than any mere words
of mine.
If I might venture on a comparison between our market
gardening operations in 1837 and 1897, I would say, Compare this
huge palace of glass in which we are assembled and its outlying
grounds with the small conservatory and vinery in the garden of
a retired suburban amateur, and you will not be very far out in
the contrast. I beg, in conclusion, to thank the kind practical
friends connected with the market trade without whose valuable
MARKET GARDEN CULTIVATION DURING QUEEN VICTORIA’S REIGN. 411
assistance it would have been imposssble for me to have re-
sponded to the wish of your Society by reading this paper
to-day.
DISCUSSION.
Mr. Rovupent expressed the pleasure with which he had
listened to the paper. He considered its grasp something
wonderful. It gave evidence of very great research. There was,
however, one omission, and that was, the paper contained no
allusion to the invasion from the Antipodes. Tasmania and
the other Australasian colonies were preparing to extend their
cultivation of fruit, and a list had already been supplied of what
the former country was able to do. He had had from the
colony of Victoria a very handsome offer if he could introduce
to the colony a good dessert Apple which could be put on the
London market early. He had suggested one or two names, but
our early varieties were not adapted for keeping. The sample
sent out should be a good early Apple, and most pleasant to eat
when taken from the tree. It should therefore be an Apple
with some of the character of the King of Pippins, or the new
Allington Pippin, that would meet the want. He was convinced
that the supply of a good Apple created a demand, and that
people when they had been accustomed to pay 4d. and 6d. a lb.
for good Australian fruit would not hesitate to pay a better
price than they had been in the habit of paying for good English
fruit later in the season. For that reason he should look with
hope rather than despair to the prospect of our having Australia
to compete with us. He was sometimes amused by the remarks
made by amateurs and gardeners in the horticultural press as to
the high quality of their produce. He wished those writers
could pay a visit to the establishments of Messrs. Kay, Ladds, or
Rochford. Such a visit would take the conceit out of them.
He had visited the establishment of Mr. Peter Kay, and was
astonished at the Grapes, the bunches being as big as horses’
heads. He thought the Royal Horticultural Society might yet
do a great deal for market growers by encouraging them and
giving facilities for exhibiting their produce at the fortnightly
and annual Shows.
Mr. GEorGE Bunyarp, Y.M.H., said Mr. Assbee had advised
a large increase in the plantation of Currants. Unfortunately
during the last few years a dire calamity had seized the Black
’ : H2
412 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Currants, and the mite Phytoptus had increased to such an
enormous extent that large plantations had to be entirely given
up. Red Currants were no doubt very useful, but the importa-
tion of a large quantity of cheap wines had almost done away
with that old English beverage the Currant-wine. With regard
to the black Currant, the trouble was that they had not been
able to find anything that would kill the mite without killing
the trees. As much young wood as possible should be kept on
the plant. Much discredit had been cast upon this wonderful
industry of fruit-growing by amateurs and others, who made
grievous mistakes in their methods of treatment, and did not
forget to air their opinions in the gardening and daily papers.
There was no risk if people would take a wise view of the
question. A man should not put all his eggs in one basket, and
he would find his profits remunerative. A good haul should not
be expected every year. He suggested that farmers and fruit
growers should combine more than they did for mutual pro-
tection and mutual benefit in fighting the excessive competition
on the part of Continental growers. As to Peaches, there was
no doubt that the large sizes would always command fine prices ;
but they should be sent to market in the best condition, and it
would pay any grower better to keep his rubbish at home than
put it upon any market.
Mr. AssBEE, replying, said that the subject of the supply —
of foreign and colonial market garden produce and its effect
upon the English market was much too large a one to be treated
except incidentally in the paper of to-day. New fields in
distant countries were being continually opened up, but
these competed more with each other in many respects than
with British growers. Jamaica, for instance, had recently
entered the field with Oranges and Bananas. The Californian
trade, to which allusion had been made and products exhibited
on the table, was, like the American and Canadian Apple
trade, likely if largely developed to have a very considerable
influence on home-grown fruit. With regard to Antipodean
fruit, it was a welcome addition to English markets, as its season
of ripening was the reverse of our own, and any importations
which tended to a continuous yearly business of the same kind
had an advantage over others which created a glut at one time to
be succeeded by a scarcity at another.
THE HOUSE SPARROW. 4138
THE HOUSE SPARROW.
(Passer domesticus, Linneus.)
By Miss Exeanor A. OrmeERop, F.E.S., and Mr. W. B.
TEGETMEIER, M.B.O.U.
THE sparrow question is one which is still constantly recurring,
as it has done for many years, and as it will continue to do,
until reliable evidence of the nature of the bird’s food is more
accessible for general information than it is at present in this
country. The mischief that is done by the sparrows is easily
observable, but excepting in connection with these noticeable
devastations the nature of their food (meaning by this what the
adult birds feed on throughout the year, and what the nestlings
are fed on) is far from having been as well brought forward as is
desirable, and the published records of as much as we know
(whether for or against Passer domesticus) are neither as well
before the public, nor as accessible to those practically concerned,
as it would be well for them to be.
When, consequent on the very ill-advised introduction by
private enterprise of this bird into the United States of
America, serious and widespread losses occurred from its
destructive habits, an investigation into the nature of its
food was set on foot under the direction of the U.S.
Board of Agriculture by examination of the contents of many
hundreds of sparrows. These were submitted for identification
to qualified members of the Ornithological Division, with final
reference to Dr. C. V. Riley, the Entomologist of the Depart-
ment, and the results were recorded both as to absence and
presence of insects, and (where insects were present) their names
and the orders to which they belonged were given, together with
information as to whether they were of habits helpful or hurtful
to the agriculturist, or, as far as was known, neither the one nor
the other; and these observations were published.* In this
country we have also good work on the subject, including
observations and examinations made by known agriculturisis,
ornithologists, and other qualified investigators, comprising
* «The Insectivorous Habits of the English Sparrow.’ By C. V. Riley,
Ph.D. (Extracted from ‘“ Bulletin No. I., Div. Ornithology and Mammalogy,
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture,” entitled ‘‘ The English Sparrow in America.’’]
414 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
records of contents of very many hundred sparrows, and notes
of the results of the absence or presence of the bird in various
localities, and for various lengths of time, up to as much as
fifteen consecutive years or more. Some of these records are
given in this paper, in the hope of making them more generally
accessible, and that further observations, also undertaken by
properly qualified hands, may help to sound views on this
important subject.
The most detailed account that is generally accessible of the
food of the house sparrow during each month of the year in
England is that given by the ornithologist, M. J. H. Gurney, of
Keswick Hall, near Norwich.* The table from which the follow-
ing information was prepared shows the contents of the
stomachs of 694 house sparrows. The dissections were made
by twelve or more qualified observers in various places, at regular
intervals throughout the whole year, the observations being
recorded under the heads of ‘ Customary Food”’ and “ Occasional
Food.”
Foop or ADULT SPARROWS.
JANUARY. Customary food.—Corn from stacks and poultry-
yards; seeds of all kinds. Occasional food.—Refuse corn,
maize, and capsules of moss.
Frpruary. Customary food.—Corn from stacks and poultry-
yards. Occasional food.—Seeds ; buds of gooseberries.t
Marcu. Customary food.—Corn, wherever they can get it.
Occasional food.—Young tops of peas, radish, cabbage, and
cauliflower ; seeds, freshly sown barley, and oats.
Aprit. Customary food.—Corn; vegetable matter. Occa-
sional food.—Freshly sown barley, and oats ; oblong green seeds,
not identified ; caterpillars.
May. Customary food.—Corn; vegetable matter; seeds.
Occasional food.—Young pea-pods and leaves of peas; goose-
berry blossoms and young gooseberries; small beetles; cater-
pillars of the brimstone moth, and white cabbage butterflies ;
* See “The House Sparrow.” Messrs. W. Wesley & Son, 28 Essex
Street, Strand, London. Pp. 11-17.
+ During January and February (1898) the gooseberries at Chiswick
have been entirely devastated by sparrows, and hardly had they finished
the gooseberries than they at once began on the plum blossom buds.
a
THE HOUSE SPARROW. 415
turnip seed; hay seed ; sprouts of young barley half an inch
long; pollen of the sycamore and apple ; mangold leaves.
JUNE. Customary food.—Corn; vegetable matter; seeds of
various sorts; peas. Occasional food.—Gooseberries and other
fruit ; lettuces; small beetles; mangold leaves.
Juty. Customary food.—Young wheat, barley, and oats;
vegetable matter; seeds of various weeds. Occasional food.—
Peas ; small beetles; beans; seeds of wild spinach.
Avaust. Customary food.—Wheat, barley, oats. Occa-
sional food.—Seeds of corn, bindweed, knotgrass, &c.; aphides,
small beetles, daddy-longlegs (Zipula), caterpillars of Teras
contaminana, moth of Crambus culmellus.
SEPTEMBER. Customary food.—Corn ; seeds of many kinds,
especially the knotgrass, and corn bindweed. Occasionat food.
—Caterpillars ; berries; seeds of plantain.
OctoBEeR. Customary food.—Grain, some of it refuse
grain ; seeds of many kinds, including knotgrass. Occasional
food not recorded.
NovEMBER. Customary food.—Grain, seeds of plants.
Occasional food.—Newly sown seeds of wheat; small cater-
pillars.
DECEMBER. Customary food.—Gyrain, principally from
stacks. Occasional food.—Seeds, maize, sprouting beans.
Foop oF YouNG SPARROWS TO THE TIME OF LEAVING
THE NEST.
May. Customary food.—Grains of last year’s corn; small
beetles; caterpillars. Occasional food.—Buds; red spider;
hair-worms ; small flies.
JUNE. Customary food.—Caterpillars of various kinds, up
to three-quarters of an inch in length; young wheat. Occasional
food.—Beetles, large brown cabbage moth, wireworm.
Juny. Customary food.—Caterpillars; beetles; soft milky
grains of wheat and barley. Occasional food.—Bluebottle-flies.
Avueust. Customary food.—Caterpillars; beetles; young
corn. Occasional food.i—Small chrysalids.
To the above records Mr. Gurney added the following sum-
mary :—‘‘ It may be said that about 75 per cent. of an adult
sparrow’s food during its life is corn of somekind. The remain-
416 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
ing 25 per cent. may be roughly divided as follows:—Seeds of
weeds, 10 per cent.; green peas, 4 per cent.; beetles, 3 per
cent.; caterpillars, 2 per cent.; insects which fly, 1 per cent. ;
other things, 5 per cent. In young sparrows not more than 40
per cent. is corn; while about 40 per cent. consists of cater-
pillars, and 10 per cent. of small beetles.” .. . “ Sparrows
should be killed for dissection in the afternoon.” ... “If the
sparrows are caught at night, they have digested their food in a
great measure.”
Some amount of good is noted by Mr. Gurney as done by
sparrows feeding (in conjunction with other little birds) on seeds
of various kinds of weeds, but the extent of benefit received in
this way varies greatly according to local circumstances. In
Hardwicke’s ‘“‘ Science Gossip,’’ 1883 (p. 217), Mr. A. Willis, of
Sandas, is noted as having made a series of examinations of
sparrows’ stomachs in 1882, and in eighty-seven of these insects
were found in only eight instances. In an exhibition, by Dr.
Edwards Crisp, of 100 stomachs of young sparrows, before the
British Association at Birmingham in 1865, not 5 per cent. of
them contained insect food. Mr. John Cordeaux opened the crops
of thirty-five young sparrows of various ages, and on an average
found two parts of soft grain and one part of insects.
The observations of Colonel Champion Russell, of Stubbers,
near Romford, Essex, record the examination of the contents of
the stomachs of sparrows shot over a wide extent of country
during fifteen years.* The following are extracts from Col.
Russell’s remarks :—‘‘ The food in the old ones was almost all
corn during the whole year; green peas were also found in them
in summer ; and in May and June, when corn is scarce, a few
wild seeds, chiefly of grass. No insect has been found by me in
a sparrow between September and March. I have not often
found one at any season (particularly between June and March)
in a sparrow old enough to feed itself, and have very seldom
found any number of insects in one, even when corn could
scarcely be got.”
The following remarks bear on a very important phase of
sparrow feeding. Colonel Russell observed :—-“ To prove that
sparrows are really useful, it is not enough to show that they
destroy some injurious insects, but it must also be proved that
* See ‘“ The House Sparrow”’ (Wesley & Son), pp. 22-24.
THE HOUSE SPARROW. 417
in their absence other birds would not destroy them at least as
effectually. This can be found out only in one way, by banishing
the sparrows from a place for some years.’’ This Col. Russell
did, his place being a fair specimen of the country, that is, having
flower and kitchen gardens, shrubberies, orchard surrounded by
meadows, with cornfields all round; and all birds excepting
sparrows were let alone. The result was that after the almost
total absence of sparrows from his garden for many years every-
thing seeemed to do better than elsewhere, many things much
better. Young peas needed no protection from birds; green peas
were not picked out of the pods (excepting one year in the fifteen,
when some other birds devoured the late peas), and the goose-
berry buds were not picked out.
In regard to special examination, Col. Russell noted :—“ Fifty
old sparrows, and sparrows which could feed themselves, were
killed one summer about my buildings and garden with food in
their crops. This food, carefully examined (as in all cases, with
a lens), was found to be corn, milky, green, and ripe; and some-
times green peas from my garden. Only two small insects
were found in the whole number. The food in them has been
much the same every year.”
“On the whole, the deduction from the food-test during fifteen
years seems to be that the sparrows are useless, and that the
insects which would be given to their young by them, if they were
allowed to live in numbers about my premises, would be so much
food taken, when they most want it, from better birds which live
entirely, or nearly so, on insects, and thus keep them, especially
caterpillars, down so effectwely in the absence of sparrows that,
when a chance pair of these come and build, there are few of
ther favourite sorts for them.”
The above paragraph is inserted in italics on account of its
importance as the result of fifty years’ observation of sparrow
life, to which, during fifteen years, examination of their contents
was added—this by a landed proprietor in a locality well suited
for observation, and so well known for his trustworthy researches
that he was examined on the Wild Birds Parliamentary Com-
mittee—and his records, together with those of Mr. Gurney and
two other observers, are officially noted by the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture as ‘‘an important European work to be
mentioned in connection with ‘ the house sparrow.’ ”’
418 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Much of Col. Russell’s collection of contents of sparrows was
long preserved in spirit or preservative medium, in small glass
jars, and clearly proved the enormous proportion of wheat grains
they contained.
With regard to detailed account of amount and nature of the
insect contents found in stomachs of sparrows, the official account
of the U.S. Board of Agriculture, prepared under the direction
and verification of Dr. C. V. Riley, Entomologist to the Depart-
ment, gives the fullest information of any we are aware of up to
date.* This report is based on examination of stomach-contents
of 522 sparrows by Dr. Hart Merriam, Ornithologist to the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Of these, which were
examined in the Ornithological Division, ninety-two alone were
found to contain insects. By stomach-contents is included not
only what is taken from the crop, but also that taken from the
gullet and the mouth. Of the above 522 stomachs, 338 of birds
killed on ground (avoiding roads) near Washington were in many
cases examined within an hour or two after death; the remaining
184 were sent to Washington in alcohol.
The report gives first a list of the specimens containing
insects, giving age of sparrow (as adult or young); also sex, date
of death, locality where killed, and name of insects found.
This is followed by a very important section, which we much
need similar details of here, namely, the “ habits of the insects
concerned.” In this the insects found are classed under heading
of the scientific names of the orders to which they belong, as
whether beetles, flies, moths, and butterflies, or others; with
notes of their life-history or habits where known, so that it can
be told whether the insect is injurious or helpful; as, for instance,
in the case of a species of Ziphia, of which one kind destroys
grubs of May-beetles, and Myzine sexcincta, of similar habits ;
of the first of which remains occur in ten stomachs; of the
second, in thirty. Also notes are given of presence, presumably
unimportant, of kinds of which little but the name is known.
All of the principal orders of insects were represented, namely,
Hymenoptera, that is, bees, ants, parasite wasps, &c., in 59
* See “ Insectivorous Habits of the English Sparrow (Passer domesticus).”
By C. V. Riley, Ph.D. [From “Bulletin No. I., Div. of Ornithology and
Mammalogy, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture,” entitled “The English Sparrow in
America.’ |
~~
THE HOUSE SPARROW. 419
stomachs; Coleoptera, beetles, in 53; Orthoptera, locusts, &c.,
in 9; Lepidoptera, as moths and butterflies, in 8; Hemuptera,
as plant-bugs, &c., in 6; Newroptera,as (in this case) some
stone-flies, and Psoci, in 3; and Dvupiera, as blue-bottle and
house-flies, in 2. Besides these, Arachnida, as spiders or parts
of spiders, or spider allies, were found in 7 stomachs.
Most of the insects noted were in developed, that is, complete,
not larval or pupal condition ; and it is mentioned in the sum-
mary that the insects taken from the sparrows were mostly of
harmless species. Attention is also drawn to the fact that during
the year in which most of the birds were shot at Washington,
the shade-trees there were suffering from insect infestation ; and
of the four different species infesting, only two specimens of one
kind were found in the sparrows’ stomachs investigated.
Many other records of observation, both American and British,
are given in the “ Bulletin,”’ and one of the concluding sentences
of Dr. Riley’s report is :—‘ Finally the examinations taken as
a whole show how thoroughly graminivorous or vegetarian the
sparrow is as a rule.”
At the meeting on April 21, 1885, at Washington, of the
Council of the American Ornithologists’ Union, the Committee
rendered its final report of considerations as to the serviceableness
or otherwise of the English sparrow, these being based on infor-
mation received in reply to their circulars of inquiries sent to
localities of the entire United States and Canada.* The report,
which contains a great amount of solid information, is too long
for insertion here; but relatively to the points now under con-
sideration, the united “verdict of the ornithologists,’’ formally
given, is ‘that there is an overwhelming mass of testimony to
the effect that the sparrow drives away certain of our most
valued species of native birds’; and in reply to the question on
the circular, ‘‘ Is it an insect-eater or a seed-eater?’’ that every
reply to this question, based on dissection, agrees in attributing
to this bird a diet almost wholly vegetable.
* For report given in full, see “‘ Forest and Stream ’”’ for Aug. 6, 1885
eo and Stream” Publishing Company, 39 Park Row, New York,
S.A.)
490 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Lists and Observations of Birds which destroy Crop and
Orchard Insects in England, and Notes of the lessening of
the number of wholly insectivorous Birds by Sparrow
attack.
In our country we have much trustworthy observation of
damage from sparrows driving away the truly insectivorous
birds, notably swallows and martins. From my own personal
observations, I can speak of martins, which built plentifully under
eaves, being driven off, so that nesting ceased consequent on
increased sparrow presence; and the following notes are from
observations sent to myself (EH. A. O.).
In 1887 I received an observation * from Colonel Champion
Russell, of Baldwins, and Stubbers, near Romford, Essex, of the
presence of sparrows in droves or thousands at the first named
place, where they had not been kept in check, but not of
martins ; whilst at Stubbers, about a mile off, where Colonel
Champion Russell had kept the sparrows in check for many years,
there was presence of martins in hundreds.
At another locality—The Moat House, Leake, near Boston,
Lincs.—where the insects were “a serious pest,’’ the occupant
took my advice and pretty well destroyed the sparrows; conse-
quently swallows and martins re-established themselves, and the
pest of insects ceased to be destructive in garden and orchard.
Mr. Christy, of Boyton Hall, Chelmsford, reported to the same
effect, that as soon as the swallows and martins had built their
nests the sparrows drove them off, and laid their own eggs in
the harried nests, and “‘as a consequence we swarm with all
kinds of noxious gnats and flies.”
In reply to an inquiry I wrote to Mr. J. H. Gurney, of
Keswick Hall, near Norwich. As askilled ornithologist, he men-
tioned that he could testify from personal observation that the
sparrows drive away the martins, and that he considered the
undoubted decrease of this species in the British Isles to be due
to their being prevented from nesting by the sparrows.
In regard to what bird-help we may look to for ridding us of
insect enemies in the absence of the sparrow, the question may
be satisfactorily answered by reference to our various excellent
* For this and the three following observations, see the ‘ Twelfth Annual
Report on Injurious Insects,’’ pp. 99, 100. Simpkin, Marshall & Co.,
Stationers’ Hall Court, London, E.C. Price 1s. 6d.
THE HOUSE SPARROW. 421
standard works on British birds; but for practical purposes the
following notes, for which I was indebted to Mr. F’. Norgate, of
Sparham, near Norwich (who has devoted particular attention to
the subject), give some useful points.
Amongst various kinds of birds serviceable generally on
forest trees, apple trees, and fruit bushes, Mr. Norgate mentions
the titmice, including the blue, cole, marsh, long-tailed, and
creat tit (and of these the blue tit may be especially observed
at work amongst aphides on gooseberry bushes); also the
warblers, woodpeckers, nuthatch, and tree-creepers. The
lesser spotted woodpecker is noted as especially frequenting
the apple; the gold-crested regulus frequents the Scotch pine,
spruce, and other Conifere; the bearded tit, yellow wagtail,
titlark, wren, cuckoo, and water rail are mentioned as service-
able in osier-beds and reeds, and in marsh-hay. Amongst goose-
berry, currant, and raspberry bushes the titmice and warblers,
the wren and the cuckoo, are noticed as of especial use.
Amongst cabbage and turnip crops the partridge, spotted
flycatcher, swifts, swallows, and martins are of use; and on
grass (besides the warblers, swallows, swifts, martins, and
partridge before mentioned) the wagtails, pipits, and starlings
are all serviceable. The cuckoo is of especial service as eating
hairy larve, and the flycatcher as destroying white butterflies.
During the twenty years in which I have received notes from
agriculturists on measures of prevention of insect attacks, many
other kinds of birds have been mentioned as serviceable, and
especially the rook (when not in such overwhelming numbers as
to do as much harm to the crop in their work of extirpation as
the insects) ; and in connection with the great attack of antler
moth in the South of Seotland in 1894, I had observations
from one district of the stomachs of the snow buntings being
full of the caterpillars in the winter.
In the case of the disastrous infestation of diamond-back
moth in 1891, in reply to my official request for information as to
what birds were observed as helpful in clearing the caterpillars
from the infested turnip and cabbage leafage, I received notes of
presence of the following kinds:—Rooks, crows, seagulls,
peewits, grey plovers, green or golden plovers, starlings,
linnets, green linnets or greenfinches, chaffinches, and
yellow-hammers. But amongst all the returns sent me, which
429, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
ranged along a wide band of country from Dover to Aberdeen, I
only find three replies favourable to sparrow help, and one of
these couched in doubtful language. On the other side, it was
mentioned that the sparrows were occupied with early oats, and
had no time to spare for caterpillars; also the sparrows and
smaller birds preferred the barley; and that the sparrows were
too numerous, and were against the swallows.* (EH. A. 0.)
The above notes are only brought forward to show that, in-
dependently of the sparrow (which is often brought forward as
if our safety from insect ravage lay in the keeping of this one
species), we are excellently supplied with a watchful and efficient
bird-police, able and willing to take the insect robbers of our
orchards and gardens in charge, and helpful, without raising undue
levies for the supply of overwhelmingly increasing progeny, and
without dispossessing far better tenants from their houses.
The rapid rate of increase of the sparrow is one of the
reasons why protection places us in such a difficult position in
saving our crops from its ravage. One pair of these birds fre-
quently produces nearly twenty young ones in the season, three
nests with five or six eggs in each being stated to be not unusual;
and a very little calculation will show that in a few years, where
no disaster betides them, the progeny of one single pair will
amount to nullions, as evidenced by the rapidity with which the
small number imported have spread over the United States,
Australia, and New Zealand.
We have evidence of the broad-scale losses caused by intro-
duction of the sparrow, in the devastations brought about by
its introduction into the United States, Canada, and Australia ;
and we have evidence in our own country of the saving of crops
and restoration of helpful birds by systematic destruction of this
one kind; but we have no reliable records of injurious effects
being caused by enforced banishment or destruction of the
sparrow.
For many years mention has been made, by those who con-
sider sparrow preservation desirable, of great disasters following
on some not clearly detailed methods of extermination or ex-
* Injury by sparrow devastation is a constantly recurring matter brought
before me, and by way of one special observation I had a record in 1884
from Mr. Gaskell, then Secretary of the Wirrall Farmers’ Club, Birkenhead,
that “the judges of our farm erops estimated the damage done by sparrows
to be one-third in some districts they judged crops in.”
THE HOUSE SPARROW. 498
pulsion of the sparrow in the countries of Hungary and Baden,
and also in the territory of Prussia; and, nearer our own time,
in Maine, and near Auxerre in France.
With regard to the three first named, a record will be found
in The Times newspaper for August 21, 1861. This gives a
translation from the French paper, the Monitewr, of a report on
four petitions relating to preservation of small birds, which had
been presented to the French Corps Législatif. The report con-
tains much information, but in respect to the emigrations of
the sparrow because the bird was aware of the plots that were
being laid against its safety, the statements cannot be said to
carry any weight. The following extract is inserted, as it is
important to agriculturists to have a correct copy of the baseless
statements they are sometimes called on to believe. The
passage is as follows:—‘“ Now, if the facts mentioned in the
petitions are exact, according to the opinion of many this bird
ought to stand much higher than he is reputed. In fact, it is
stated that a price having been set upon his head in Hungary
and Baden, the intelligent proscrit left those countries ; but it
was soon discovered that he alone could manfully contend
against the cockroaches and the thousand winged insects of the
lowlands, and the very men who offered a price for his destruc-
tion offered a still higher price to introduce him again into the
country. . . . Frederick the Great had also declared war against
the sparrows, which did not respect his favourite fruit the
cherry. Naturally the sparrows could not pretend to resist the
conqueror of Austria, and they emigrated ; but in two years not
only were there no more cherries, but scarcely any other sort of
fruit—the caterpillars ate them all up—and the great victor on
so many fields of battle was happy to sign peace at the cost of a
few cherries with the reconciliated sparrows.”’
With regard to the destruction and consequent results stated
to have occurred in Maine and near Auxerre, at present our very
best endeavours have failed to find that the statement of this
having occurred rests on any authoritative basis; and the only
definite notice of the subject which we have found is that in
the neighbourhood of Auxerre there was an injudicious destruc-
tion of small birds generally, and not only of Passer domesticus.*
* See “The House Sparrow at Home and Abroad,” by Thomas G.
Gentry, p. 26. Philadelphia, 1878.
494 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
SUMMARY.
In the present space it is impossible to enter fully on this
important national matter, but still we find, in addition to what
all concerned know too well already of the direct and obvious
losses from sparrow marauding, that there is evidence of the
injurious extent to which they drive off other birds, as the
swallows and martins, which are much more helpful on
account of their being wholly insectivorous; also that, so far
from the sparrow’s food being wholly of insects at any time of
_ the year, even in the young sparrows only half has been found
to be composed of insects; and of the food of the adults, it was
found from examination that in a large proportion of instances
no insects at all were present, and of these many were of kinds
that are helpful to us or harmless. Also it is well on record
that there are many kinds of birds which help us greatly by
devouring insects, and that where sparrows have systematically
been destroyed for a long course of years all have fared better
for their absence; and also attention should be drawn to the
enormous powers of increase of this bird, which under not only
protection, but to some extent absolute fostering, raises its
numbers so disproportionately as to destroy the natural balance.
Here as yet we have no movement beyond our own attempts
to preserve ourselves, so far as we legally may, from sparrow
devastations; but in the United States of America (on the
evidence of which we have given a part) the Association of the
American Ornithologists gave their collective recommendation
that all existing laws protecting the sparrow should be repealed,
and bounties offered for its destruction; and the law protecting
the sparrow has been repealed in Massachusetts and Michigan.
Dr. Hart Merriam, the Ornithologist of the U.S. Board of
Agriculture, also officially recommended immediate repeal
of all laws affording protection to the English sparrow, and
enactment of laws making it penal to shelter or harbour it ;
and Professor C. V. Riley, Entomologist to the Department,
similarly conveyed his views officially as to it being a destructive
bird, worthless as an insect killer.
In Canada, on October 6, 1888, at the annual meeting of
the Entomological Society of Ontario, Mr. J. Fletcher, Entomo-
logist of the Experimental Farms of the Department, strongly
advocated the destruction of the sparrow; and, in reply to the
ON TOMATO CULTIVATION. 425
Hon. C. W. Drury, Minister of Agriculture (who attended the
meeting as head of the Agricultural Department of Ontario),
stated ‘‘that this destructive bird was no longer under the pro-
tection of the Act of Parliament respecting insectivorous birds,
and that everyone was at liberty to aid in reducing its numbers.”’
Reasoning on the same grounds as to procedure in this
country, we believe that similar action is, without any reason-
able cause for doubt, called for here. The amount of the
national loss, by reason of ravaged crops and serviceable birds
driven away, may be estimated, without fear of exaggeration, at
from one to two millions a year.
We do not pretend to offer suggestions as to what may be
considered fitting to do by Government authority, but much of
their own protection lies in the hands of farmers and gardeners
themselves ; and sparrow clubs, well worked, and always bearing
in mind that it is only this one bird that is earnestly recommended
to their attention, would probably lessen the load to a bearable
amount; and we believe that subscriptions, whether local or
from those who know the desirableness of aiding in the work of
endeavouring to save the bread of the people from these feathered
robbers, would be money wisely and worthily spent.
ON TOMATO CULTIVATION.
A Paper based on Experiments carried out at the Cheshire Agri-
cultural and Horticultural School, Holmes Chapel, in 1896
and 1897.
By Mr. W. Neitp, F.R.H.S.
Tomatos have been grown in this country for a period of more
than 300 years, but it is only in comparatively recent years that
the public have begun to appreciate them. In former years it
was only in large gardens that they were grown, and they were
then used for soups and sauces. At the present time the taste
for them has undergone a complete change, and, instead of
their consumption being restricted to the affluent, they are eaten
by nearly everyone. To meet the increasing demand for good
fruit some of the large growers for market have covered acres
of land with glass erections, and each year these are being
added to; yet with all these, and the surplus from private
I
496 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
gardens, the supply of home-grown fruit is insufficient to meet
the growing demand. Large quantities are imported from the
Channel Islands in summer, and from the Canary Islands
during the winter months. If a sufficient quantity of home-
grown fruit could’ be obtained, there is no doubt whatever it
would be eaten in preference to that which is imported, because
it is incomparably better.
Tomatos are amongst the most easily grown and accommo-
dating plants in cultivation ; but in order to obtain the maximum
amount of fruit that they are capable of producing their require-
ments must be thoroughly understood and carefully attended
to. The grower who can devote a house exclusively to them is
in a much better position for obtaining the best possible results
than one who has to grow them in houses in which there is a
mixed collection of plants. During the summer months a
supply may be obtained from plants grown in the greenhouse or
plant-house after the majority of the legitimate occupants are
placed outside.
A fair measure of success may be obtained by growing them
in ordinary garden frames. The frames should have a sharp
pitch towards the south, in order to obtain as much sunshine as
possible. A narrow ridge of soil, eight inches deep and the
same in width, should be placed along the inside front of the
frame. The plants should be put in one foot apart, and confined
to a single stem: these should be supported on laths or wires
stretched from end to end of the frame at about eight inches
below the glass and the same distance apart.
For a period of from three to four months—commencing at the
end of May—Tomatos will grow most luxuriantly outside, and
many of the smaller fruited varieties will set their fruit very
freely in this part of Cheshire, but comparatively few fruits
attain maturity. Unless the green fruit can be used for home
consumption,it is comparatively worthless, as at present it is
not a marketable commodity.
METHOD OF CULTIVATION.
To provide an early summer supply, the seed should be
sown towards the end of November. Use well-drained pots or
boxes, filled to within one inch of the top with a compost of
loam, leaf soil, and sand in equal proportions. The compost
ON TOMATO CULTIVATION. 427
should be broken up finely, so as to prevent injury as much as
possible to the young and tender roots when transferring
them to small pots. The seeds should be sown about half an
inch apart, and thinly covered with soil. If the soil is inclined
to dryness, it would be better to water it before sowing rather
than afterwards. A sheet of glass placed on top of the seed pot or
box will prevent the depredations of vermin, and keep the soil
in a uniformly moist condition. A temperature of from 60° to
65° Fahr. will be suitable for the germination of the seeds. When
the seedlings are well above the soil, they should be placed close to
the glass to prevent them becoming drawn upand weakly. When
they have made three or four rough leaves, they should be care-
fully removed from the seed pots, and placed singly in small
pots. It is advisable to cover the stem right up to the cotyle-
dons, or seed leaves, to induce the formation of roots that will
afterwards contribute to form a healthy, vigorous plant. From
pots 24 inches in diameter they may be transferred to others
5 inches across, and subsequently into 10-inch pots, which are
quite large enough to support a good crop of fruit, or they may
be planted out in a prepared border of soil. Under no circum-
stances is it advisable to allow the plants to become root-bound
before they are placed in their fruiting quarters.
All of our plants, both in 1896 and 1897, were grown singly
in pots 10 inches in diameter. The mould used in the fruiting
pots was of a heavy and adhesive description. It was taken
from a pasture field, and was stacked for a few months previous
to using, in order to destroy the vitality of the grasses and other
indigenous plants growing upon it. Nothing was added to the
soil at the final potting with the exception of a small quantity
of lime rubble, for supplying food to the plants, and to prevent
the soil from becoming too adhesive. The pots were efficiently
drained to allow the superfluous water to pass away freely.
When the plants are well established in the fruiting pots, and
have a large expanse of foliage, they require a copious supply
of water to take the place of that which is dispersed by the
evaporation from the soil and by transpiration from the leaves ;
therefore it is necessary that provision should be made to
allow surplus water to escape, otherwise it would cause the soil
to become sour and inert; a condition that would be detri-
mental to the health of the plants. Growers should be very
12
498 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
careful to note whether the soil is dry before applying water.
In spring and early summer the young and tender shoots and
leaves flag or droop under the influence of strong sunshine,
especially after a period of dull weather, although the soil in
which they are growing may be sufficiently wet. It is under
such conditions that the inexperienced seriously injure their
plants by watering them, under the mistaken impression that
the drooping is brought about by dryness at the root, whereas
it is caused by the transpiration of water from the leaves being
greater than the roots can supply.
The plants were restricted to one main stem; all the laterals
or side shoots were removed when they were quite small. A
heavier and more regular crop of fruit can be obtained by this
system than by any other. The main leaves were not cut or
mutilated in any way so long as they remained in a healthy
condition. The far too common practice of almost defoliating
the plants cannot be too strongly condemned, as it has an
injurious effect upon the yield and quality of the fruit. The
plants were grown in houses recently planted with vines and
Peaches. Many of them were trained to the back wall at a
considerable distance from the glass. Had they been grown in
houses specially constructed, and devoted entirely to them,
there is every reason to suppose that a heavier crop would have
been obtained. In 1896 an attack of Potato disease (Phyto-
phthera infestans) made its appearance early in May on the
Hackwood Park variety. The plants were sprayed with a
solution of } lb. sulphate of copper and 3 lb. quicklime mixed in
10 gallons of water, which removed all traces of disease in the
later fruits.
YIELD, VALUE, AND VARIETIES.
The plants grown in 1896 were raised from seed sown in the
previous December, and the first ripe fruits were gathered on
the following May 4. The average yield was over 8} lbs. per
plant, the total yield of fruit from 130 plants was1,127 lbs. The
price varied from 6d. to 1s. per lb. The total amount realised,
after payment of carriage and commission, was £85. 6s. 6d.,
thus averaging 74d. per lb. The varieties grown were Hackwood
Park and Neild’s seedling. The former is a prolific variety, but
its fruit is too large to suit the requirements of consumers. The
latter variety is a seedling of my own raising. It was tried at
ON TOMATO CULTIVATION. 429
Chiswick in 1896, and was given an “award of merit” by the
R.H.S., who state that itis of “ compact growth, great cropper,
clusters overlapping each other, averaging six fruits each;
moderate size, round, smooth, dark red, solid, and good flavour.”’
Smooth fruits of medium size are more highly appreciated in
the market than large ones. In nearly every instance the
smaller fruits realised from 1d. to 2d. per lb. more than the
larger ones.
EXPERIMENTS IN MANURING DURING THE YEAR 1896.
No manure was applied until the roots had taken full posses-
sion of the soil, at which time a number of plants growing in
different houses, and under varying conditions as to light and
sunshine, were selected for the purpose of experimenting with
the following manures, which were applied fortnightly at the
rate of one-eighth of an ounce to each plant. In each case
where more than one kind of manure was used they were mixed
in equal proportions, and the exact quantity given. The plants
were carefully attended to, and their condition and results noted
at the time.
No.1. Nitrate of soda and muriate of potash.
,, 2. Superphosphate of lime, muriate of potash, and sulphate
of iron.
,, 3. Sulphate of ammonia and muriate of potash.
», 4. Muriate of potash, sulphate of iron, and nitrate of
soda.
,, 5. Sulphate of iron and muriate of potash.
», 6. Muriate of potash.
7. Sulphate of iron.
,, 8. Nitrate of soda.
5, 9. Sulphate of ammonia.
,, 10. Superphosphate of lime.
Nos. 2, 5, 6, 7, and 10 were quite a failure; the fruit was
below the average size, and the foliage had a yellow sickly
appearance, indicating a deficiency of nitrogen in the soil.
The plants appeared so unhealthy that several persons who
were not experienced in plant growing noticed their poor con-
dition.
Nos. 3 and 4 produced a moderate crop, and appeared to be
fairly healthy. ?
480 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Nos. 1, 8, and 9 were good, strong, healthy plants, and pro-
duced a full crop of fruit. These plants were very similar in
condition to others that were supplied with diluted liquid
manure from the stables and shippons, but in the end the latter
produced the most satisfactory results. It may be observed that
sulphate of ammonia alone produced better results than when
combined with muriate of potash. Potassic manures have long
been considered the best for Tomatos, and yet when muriate of
Potash was applied by itself it proved to be a failure.
The plants grown in 1896 were raised from seed sown in the
previous December, and the first ripe fruits gathered on the
following May 4. It was thought that by sowing earlier, and
having large and strong plants, the ripe fruit could be produced
earlier in the season. Consequently seed was sown at the end
of August, and the young plants were established in pots five
inches in diameter before winter set in. The result was not
quite satisfactory. Ripe fruit was gathered a fortnight earlier,
but the yield per plant was considerably less from these early
sown plants than from others of the same variety sown at a
later period of the year. The fruit set quite freely, but failed to
attain a useful size. This we attribute to a deficiency of pollen
during the winter season, as the fruit produced from flowers
opening in the spring was of the normal size. The small fruits
contained very few seeds, and when they reached maturity were
quite agreeable to the taste, differing but little in flavour from
normal fruits, except that they appeared to contain more sugar.
EXPERIMENTS IN MANURING IN THE YEAR 1897.
It should be mentioned that no natural or farmyard manure
was mixed with the soil, as we believe it has a tendency to
produce gross shoots that are more subject to the attacks of
disease. Artificial manures were not applied until the plants
exhibited signs of having used up all the available food in the
soil. With a view to ascertaining the most beneficial manure
three sets of plants were selected, the plants in each set
growing under exactly similar conditions.
In each case the manure was crushed fine, and when more
than one kind was given, they were thoroughly mixed together.
Each kind or mixture was applied, at the rate of one-eighth of
an ounce to each plant, on the surface, and watered in. A fort-
~%
a
ON TOMATO CULTIVATION. 431
night elapsed between the first two applications, but afterwards
an application was given every week, until towards the end of
the season, with evident advantage to the plants.
No. 1. Kainit.
. Nitrate of potash.
. Kainit and nitrate of soda, equal parts.
. Nitrate of potash and nitrate of soda, equal parts.
. Kainit, nitrate of soda, and sulphate of iron, equal parts.
. Nitrate of potash, nitrate of soda, and sulphate of iron,
equal parts.
» 7. Nitrate of potash, nitrate of soda, sulphate of iron, and
superphosphate of lime, equal parts.
, 8. Kainit, nitrate of soda, sulphate of iron, superphosphate
of lime, equal parts.
» 9. Two parts kainit to one part nitrate of soda.
,, 10. Two parts nitrate of potash to one part nitrate of soda.
,, 11. Two parts nitrate of soda to one part kainit.
,,12. Two parts nitrate of soda to one part nitrate of potash.
,, 18. One part nitrate of potash, one superphosphate of lime,
one nitrate of soda.
,14. One part kainit, one part superphosphate of lime, one
nitrate of soda.
,,15. One part nitrate of potash to one part sulphate of
ammonia.
,, 16. Muriate of potash.
17. No manure of any kind.
Oo or HH OC bo
Nos. 1, 2, and 16 in each case were quite a failure, which
leads me to believe that potassic manure is of very little or no use
for Tomatos. When the available food in the soil was used up
the leaves turned yellow, and the flowers failed to set. A light
dressing of nitrate of soda was then applied, and in the course of
three or four days there was a marked improvement in their
condition. No. 17 was very poor, but it did not appear to be in
a worse condition than Nos. 1, 2,and 16. Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,
9, and 10 produced very fair results. Nos. 11, 14, and 15 were
good. Decidedly the best results were obtained from Nos. 12
and 18, and these were so equally balanced that it was im-
possible to say which was the better of the two.
The remainder of our plants were frequently supplied with
diluted liquid manure from the stables, which acted most
432 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
beneficially on them, and confirmed our previous opinion that
good liquid manure is still one of the best fertilisers.
PACKING AND PREPARING THE FRUIT FoR MARKET.
Large quantities of fruit are destroyed by bad packing. In
many instances the fruit is placed loosely several layers deep in
baskets or boxes, with the result that in most cases it arrives at
its destination in a bruised and damaged condition. The best
system of packing is to place the fruit in a single layer in
shallow boxes. The boxes should be strong and light, holding
from 10 to 15 lbs. each; and when a larger quantity is to be
sent away a number of boxes should be placed on the top of
each other, and fastened together with strong cord. A little soft
hay, dry sphagnum moss, or wood wool should be placed in the
bottom of the box, and on this a covering of soft white paper.
The fruit should be packed closely together, stalk end down-
wards. When the box is full or the requisite quantity put in,
the fruit should be covered with paper and all vacant spaces
filled with the packing material before the top is put on. Too
much emphasis cannot be laid upon the absolute necessity of
packing the fruit firmly, to prevent it moving about, as it would
thereby become damaged. Neither grass nor any damp material
should be used for packing Tomatos, for if they remain in the
boxes for several hours, heating or fermentation takes place,
which materially injures the quality of the fruit. When
Tomatos are sent to market, or have to undergo a railway
journey, itis advisable to gather them before they are fully ripe,
as in that state they would reach their destination in better con-
dition. It should, however, be remembered that probably there
is no fruit that deteriorates more quickly than the Tomato after
it is removed from the plant. Itis owing to this fact that home-
grown Tomatos are so incomparably better than those imported.
When Tomatos have attained their full size, and are cut off in
a green state, they will subsequently assume an appearance of
ripening, but there can be no comparison between such fruit
and that which is ripened on the plant.
EXPERIMENTS IN GRAFTING IN 1896.
An interesting experiment was made by grafting the Tomato
on the stem of the Potato, and vice versa. The Tomato grafted
HARDY-PLANT BORDERS. 433
on the Potato produced a good crop of fruit, although not equal
in quantity, nor were the individual fruits so large as those pro-
duced by plants growing on their own roots. The Potato stock
did not produce the least perceptible change in the flavour of
the fruit. A curious circumstance in connection with this union
was that the Potato tubers emitted roots quite freely, where,
under normal conditions, buds are produced. The Potato stems
grafted on Tomato plants did not grow so freely as the Tomato
on the potato. Small tubers were produced in the axils of the
leaves. The tubers were quite green, and in course of growth
produced a number of small buds.
HARDY-PLANT BORDERS.
By Miss GERTRUDE JEKYLL, V.M.H., and Mr. H. Seure-
LEONARD.
We have been asked by the Council of the Royal Horticultural
Society to contribute to its JOURNAL some plans of hardy
plant borders, prepared more particularly with a view to main-
taining a long succession of blossom or plant beauty. The
following plans are the result. The observation is obvious that
they are but a slight contribution to a subject of great import-
ance, much in want of thorough and varied treatment at the
hands of those practically experienced in garden arrangements ;
and we therefore trust that similar contributions may be made
from other quarters.
The first of the following plans (fig. 102) is for a hardy flower
border on a large scale to furnish a decorative plant picture
and a succession of flowers from about the middle of May to the
middle or end of September. It will be well, however, to state
a little more particularly the lines on which it has been pre-
pared, both as an aid in the planting (it may be in the further
planting or bettering) of the border, and to prevent those from
adopting it (and they may be many) whose wants and conditions
it may not suit.
In the first place, it is so far on a large scale (say 15 ft. wide
by 135 ft. long) that though it might perhaps be much enlarged,
even, with advantage, to suit large places (somewhat similar pro-
484 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
portions of length to breadth being retained), its scale could
not, on the other hand, be much lessened without loss of effect.
This fact would make it unsuitable for very small gardens.
In the second place, large decorative effect being one of its
main objects, a limited number of kinds of plants have been
used, but each of these generally in considerable quantity and
in naturally grown masses. It will thus be seen that the plan
will not be suitable to the needs of those who, whether from
want of space or other cause, are wanting a border which shall
contain a great number of species and varieties.
In the third place, plants which bloom before May or after
September have been generally omitted from this plan. In
our opinion the later blooming plants, such, for instance, as the
finer Michaelmas Daisies, are on the whole better grown in a
bed by themselves and not in a mixed border like the present.
And, again, as regards those blooming earlier, it is thought that
though on the one hand there is doubtless room for the in-
genious introduction of spring-blooming plants (bulbous and
other),even in quantity, through and among the summer-blooming
occupants of such a border, where reasons sufficient exist for
that course, yet on the other hand any such attempts at a spring
display are better made elsewhere, or at least quite subordinated
to the principal purpose. This for several reasons. The fading
foliage of spring-blooming plants is an unwelcome intrusion
upon the border during summer. These, too, rob the soil not a
little, and occupy space better given to summer-blooming plants.
All such questions must of course be decided on the balance of
advantages ; and doubtless such will not infrequently be found
to be on the side of borders, so mixed as to include both spring
and late autumn-blooming plants. In the case, however, of the
plan now in question it has for the reasons given been thought
well to exclude them.
It may be added that in the selection of the plants, regard
has been paid to securing beauty of foliage as well as of flower,
and that so far as those plants are concerned which have been
included on this account (e.g. Megaseas and Funkias) their
blooming season has been disregarded.
Finally, it will be noticed that in this plan flowers of one
colour, though of successive flowering seasons, have been brought
together in the groups with the purpose of securing a good mass
Gy 40 48 55 55
: 28(29) 33 39 ee ‘ 55 6)
a (30) ge ee a
RS (42) x 54 a
x 62
325 ea : 59 a
2 Pe a Xx x
fo ae Be - x x ane oy a me xy x
Fie. 102.—First Puan or Harpy-puant Borprr. N.B.—The Plan has been cut in two in the centre for ease of reference.
Se
mojag =panulzguUoy
HARDY-PLANT BORDERS. 4385
of nearly related colouring. Harmonies rather than contrasts
have been studied.
' We do not wish to suggest that no additions, or even sub-
stitutions, can be advantageously made in this plan, if only they
be made with knowledge and study. Especially is there room
for the introduction to this border, temporarily, of fine later
blooming subjects—whether in pots or otherwise—for the pur-
pose of masking or replacing plants which have become
unsightly. A small reserve ground or frame will be found a
useful adjunct to such a border.
INDEX TO NUMBERS ON FIRST PLAN. (Fia. 102.)
1. Yuecas. Preferably Y. gloriosa
and (or) Y. recurva, where
good specimens can be secured,
and the climate is not too
cold. Otherwise Yucca fila-
mentosa (of commerce) must
be used. It has the advan-
tage of being a comparatively
free bloomer.
2. Polygonum compactum. It is
important to have this species,
others (large enough) being
too weedy.
3. Iris florentina, white flower-
ing and early; and I. albicans,
a finer white and later bloomer,
but needing a warm soil and
aspect.
4. Pink Phlox decussata, e.g.,
Eugénie, or any other fine
true pink.
5. Pink Japanese Anemone, ¢.g.,
A. Jap. elegans.
5a. Madonna Lilies (Lilium candi-
dum). Marked thus ris :
6. Cannas. For introduction about
the month of July, in or from
pots, in front of Delphiniums,
&e.
7. Anemone sylvestris.
8. Funkia (subcordata) grandiflora
(white-flowered form only).
9. Three pink Hollyhocks.
10. Delphiniums.
11. Pink Ponies (vars. of albiflora
best, e.g., Belle Douaisienne).
12. Veratrum nigrum.
13 and 14. Cannas, or Dahlias
(as above, the colours being
chosen to harmonise with
their autumn surroundings).
15. Yellow Day Lilies (Hemero-
callis flava, followed by
H. Thumbergi; half of
each).
16. Iris pallida. Varieties Dal-
matica or odorata.
17. Megasea, varieties of (M.cordi
folia purp. is best for flowers;
all are about equally good for
foliage).
18. Thalictrums, preferably T.
flavum and MT. aquilegi-
folium.
19 and 20. Dahlias or Cannas (for
autumn succession) as before.
21. Tritomas (uvaria). Torch
Lilies.
22. Iris (so-called Germanica)
aurea, fine yellow.
23. Helianthus multiflorus, double.
24, Oriental Poppies and Gypso-
phila paniculata. The latter
blooms after the former has
died down and covers the
bare space.
25. Tritomas (uvaria or aloides).
26. Lychnis chalcedonica, double
and (or) single.
27. Cannas.
28. Helianthus multiflorus majo
(single).
29, 30, and 31. Dahlias, scarlet,
e.g., Lady Ardilaun (tallest),
Cochineal and Fire King
(medium height).
32. Cannas. These, of course, must
be removed by winter, as also
the Dahlias.
486 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
InpEx To NumBers on First Pran—(continued).
33. Tritoma nobilis. 45. Monarda didyma (best scarlet).
34, Lychnis chalcedonica. 46, Ginothera missouriensis (= Ci.
35. Oriental Poppies and Gypso- macrocarpa).
phila paniculata (as before). 47. Megaseas.
36. Heucheras (H. rubrifolia or 48. Verbascums, e.g., V. Phlo-
Richardsoni preferably). moides and V. Chaixi.
37. Lilium umbellatum (or other 49. Delphiniums.
good orange summer-blooming 50. Pink Hollyhocks. .
variety). 51. Eryngiums of sorts. KE.
38. Tall Orange Day Lilies, e.g., Oliverianum at the back will
the fine new Hemerocallis be best. In front for contrast,
aurant. major, or H. Kwanso, E. alpinum, E. giganteum, &c.
fi. pl. 52. Lilium candidum and Gypso-
39. Echinops ritro (blue Globe phila paniculata.
Thistle. 53. Pink Ponies.
40. Thalictrum flavum. 54. Lilium auratum.
41 and 42. Dahlias or Cannas. 55. Delphiniums.
43. Telekia speciosa. In strong 56, 57, and 58. Dahlias and (or)
soil this might run too coarse. Cannas.
In_ such cases Achillea 59. Iris (pallida) Dalmatica or
Eupatorium (Parker’s variety) odorata
should be substituted. 60. Funkia grandiflora.
44, Hnothera fruticosa (e.g., CG. 61. Polemonium himalaicum.
Fraseri or Gi. Youngi). 62. Yuccas. See No. 1.
The foregoing plan has comprised, it will be remembered,
plants blooming in late spring, summer, and early autumn. In
the first of the two following plans (fig. 103) will be found only
those blooming in spring or summer, say till the beginning of
August. In the second (fig. 104) will be found only late summer
or autumn blooming plants.
The first of these may be found useful in those many gardens
which are quitted by their owners at the end of the London
season; the second in those country seats which, until that
time, remain unoccupied. It is obvious that a border planned
for all or many seasons can never be as full or as brilliant
during any one of them as can a border furnished for one season
alone. Hither of these plans may, however, be so modified that
the border, while retaining, for its main purpose, beauty during
one season only, shall not be wholly bare for the rest of the year.
For instance, in the autumn border, spring bulbs may be planted.
And in the earlier border, either autumn blooming bulbs may be
inserted, or even not a few carefully selected herbaceous plants—
these latter by the side of the leafless roots of early blooming
subjects, whose beauty is past, and whose sere foliage it is well
thus to mask. Further (and as in former plan), Dahlias, Cannas
HARDY-PLANT BORDERS. 437
or other tender plants may well be introduced yearly for the
like purpose. Nor will much ingenuity be required to introduce
into either plan a number of good things of even winter interest,
and for the sake either of their foliage or their flower at that
season. This winter interest, however, may perhaps be best
secured by mainly furnishing with evergreen plants the “ rockery
edgings,’’ which it will be seen are suggested for both of these
borders. Such edgings are to be recommended on several
srounds, e.g. as imparting a desirable ‘finish’ to the border,
as increasing the variety and interest of the plants brought
together, and as enabling alpine and rock plants to be introduced
with success and effect. It is indeed surprising how many, even
high mountain, plants may thus be grown, and those who are
without rockery and rock garden may be content to grow their
alpines in the manner here suggested.
These plans (figs. 103, 104) have not been drawn to any very
precise scale. The proportion of length to width is roughly, it will
be seen, about five to one. The larger the scale the better, up to,
say, 830 feet wide, and long in proportion. As regards the edgings
the stones should be sunk naturally, their largest face undermost,
to one-half or two-thirds of their depth, and so that when in
position they do not rise many inches above the level of the bed.
It is best that the front edge of the stones should be below the
ground level. That care is taken in regard to the depth and
quality of the soil in these borders is assumed. Effect will, of
course, be lost with much reduction in the size of the borders.
But the plans will still be found available, though on a much
smaller scale, and the selection of plants for their season will,
we think, be found good, although these may not be planted in
those large “colonies’”’ or quantities which alone can do full
justice to their beauty.
The form of the borders may well be varied, and be made
more natural and uneven.
It should be added that, while in the first plan colour effect has
been much studied-(and variety in the material used less so), in
plans 2 and 3 the main effort has been to collect and group as
many as possible of the beautiful and interesting plants of the
respective seasons.
The ‘“rockery-edging” surrounding the border is closely
furnished between the stones with such plants as the following :—
488 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Hardy heaths in variety ; those which bloom in autumn are best
omitted from the early border—the larger number bloom in
spring.
Saxifrages in variety—mossy and encrusted. Include particularly
the pink §.-Rhei, and the red S. atropurpurea; also
S. Wallacei and the early bloomers, S. apicularis, 8.
sancta, S. oppositifolia.
Aubrietias in variety, particularly the neat A. tauricola and the
red A. Leichtlini; Phlox of the spring-blooming sections,
especially Phlox ‘ Vivid’ (pink), Phlox the Bride or P.
nivalis (white), and also Phlox amena, Achillea tomentosa,
A. umbellata, A. clavenne, Gentianellas, &c.
Arabis in variety ; Helianthemums, single and double in many
colours. Hdelweiss, Cerastiums, Sedums, and Sempervivums.
Anemone pulsatilla, and other dwarf Anemones.
Thymes of many varieties, e.g. white-flowered, magenta-flowered,
and woolly-leaved.
The great bulk of low-growing alpines and rock plants in-
cluded in the leading catalogues are also suitable for the
purpose.
INDEX TO NUMBERS ON SECOND PLAN. (Fic. 103.)
1. Bambusas (eg. B. Metake,
hardiest.)
2. Crimson Rambler Rose (three
or four on 8 ft. rough larch
poles).
3. White Roses (climbing, on do.).
4. Aralia Maximoviczii.
5. Malus floribunda.
6. Crategus Lelandi.
7. Crambe cordifolia.
8. Dimorphanthus mandshuricus.
9. Ferula gigantea.
10. Arundo Donax.
11. Prunus Pissardi.
12. Aralia spinosa.
13. Clematis montana (on rough
poles).
14. Rosa rugosa (type, and alba).
14a.Golden Yew (or, if backed by
wall, Choisya ternata).
15. Berberis Darwinii.
16. Berberis stenophylla.
17. Arundo Donax.
18. Salix regalis.
19. Spirea ariefolia.
20. Double Cherry (standard).
21. Double Almond.
22. Berberis stenophylla.
23. Berberis Darwinii.
24. Rosa rugosa Mdme. Geo.
Bruant.
25. Golden Yew.
26. Dimorphanthus mandshuricus.
27. Rubus spectabilis.
28. Cydonia (Pyrus) Japonica.
29. Evergreen Roses (on rough
larch poles).
30. Heracleum giganteum.
31. Cut leaved Rheum.
The foregoing, it will be ob-
served, furnish the back of the
border with large-habited subjects.
This backing may be abandoned
where it is necessary to plant to
the plan on a small scale. Unless
a minimum width of 6 ft. can be
allowed for this backing it is better
dispensed with; indeed, almost
necessarily so.
. 832. Yuccas: e.g. Y. gloriosa or
recurva.
33. Tritoma
blooming).
34. Iris (German) aurea, &c.
35. Iris hispan. “ Leander,” and
Gypsophila.
caulescens (July
Fo
~~
54.
55.
. Delphiniums
HARDYP-LANT BORDERS.
439
IxnpEx To NumBers oN Seconp Puian—-(continwed).
. Irises, “ Innocenza’’ and Bena-
censis.
. Pink and white varieties of
dwarf Phloxes (decussata).
and Madonna
Lilies.
. Iris orientalis, var. ochroleuca
or gigantea.
. Tall Delphiniums in variety,
Gypsophila in front.
. Double pink and Double white
Peeonies.
. Self Carnations.
. Helianthemums.
. Oriental Poppies, selected vars.,
and Red Opium Poppy for suc-
cession.
. Day Lilies, H. flava, H. Thum-
bergi, and H. aurant. major.
. Erica carnea.
. Helianthemums.
. Statice latifolia in ground-work
of Waldsteinia trifoliata.
. Scabiosa ochroleuca.
. Crown
Imperials, especially
the yellow.
. Tall early Daffodils, of large
trumpet section, with select
double Potentillas to succeed.
. Achillea Eupatorium.
. Iris pallida, lavender (better in
the vars. dalmatica an odo-
rata), and I. albicans (white).
Single Pyrethrums,choice vars.,
with Daffodils in variety to
precede.
Lilies, early, as longiflorum
(white), umbellatum (orange),
é&c.; Crocus in clumps inter-
spersed.
. Achillea filipendula.
. Thalictrum flavum, Iris aurea
(species).
. Iris ochroleuca, and I. spurius
or I. Monspur.
. Gnothera Lamarckiana.
. Rhus cotinus atropurp. (carpet
with Aubrietia).
. Alyssum argenteum (shrubby).
. Dictamnus fraxinella and D.
frax. alba.
. Epimediums.
. Cheiranthus of sorts (alpinus,
Marshalli, mutabilis, and mu-
tabilis var. purpureus).
. Carnations and Statices.
. Lychnis chalcedonica.
. Campanula (Platycodon) Ma-
riesi, and do. album.
68.
69.
70.
89.
90.
SE
92.
93.
Double Ponies with Gypso-
phila in front.
Select German Iris.
Eremurus in variety, but only
if the large scale of the border
be retained.
. Dicentra spectabilis, and, for
succession, Red Opium Poppy.
. Veronicas (shrubby) (Colensoi,
and others of medium height),
bulbs among and surrounding
them.
. Rhus cotinus, with Chiono-
doxas and other small bulbs;
Veronicas, salicornioides, Ly-
alli, and other small species.
. Linums, narbonense and L.
monogynum.
5. Choisya ternata.
. Cistus ladaniferus.
. Coreopsis lanceolata.
. Tulipa Gesneriana and others,
interspersed with Veronicas
carnosula and epacrioides for
succession.
. Young’s Golden Juniper (stan-
dard).
. Tulipa Greigi and Veronica
buxifolia.
. Narcissus in variety, Potentilla
formosa, and Potentilla fruti-
cosa.
. Seabiosa caucasica (in front),
Scab. ochroleuca (in rear).
. Delphiniums, Madonna Lilies,
and Phlox coccinea (in masses
side by side, not mixed).
. Berberis dulcis nana, Narcissus
planted round.
. Primula denticulata, and P. d.
alba, and P. capitata, with
carpet of Herniaria glabra.
. Helianthemums.
. Dicentra
spectabilis, Gypso-
phila paniculata between.
. Standard Golden Yew, with
surrounding carpet of mossy
Saxifrage.
Selected Pzeonies, rose and
white (in rear), selected Ger-
man Iris, e.g. aurea, Mdme.
Chereau, Queen of May,
Innocenza (in masses in front).
Yellow Crown Imperials and
Gypsophila paniculata.
Statice latifolia.
Carnations (border selfs) and
Pink ‘‘Snowflake’’ (in front).
Yucca recurva.
440 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
INDEX TO NUMBERS ON THIRD PLAN. (Fa. 104.)
1. Bambusas, e.g. B. Metake (the
hardiest).
2 and 3. Climbing Roses, of con-
trasting colours; autumn
bloomers, on poles; three of
each. (Gloire de Dijon,
Zephirine, Drouot.)
. Aralia Maximoviczii.
. Tritoma nobilis, T. grandis,
T. Lachesis.
. Crategus Lelandi.
. Standard (6 ft.) Cotoneaster
microphylla. Rose ‘ Stan-
well”? beneath.
8. Dimorphanthus mandshuricus.
9. Eulalia zebrina.
10. Arundo Donax.
11. Prunus Pissardi.
12. Aralia spinosa.
13. Helianthus orgyalis. Rosa
rugosa alba, in front.
14. Golden Yew.
15. Rosa rugosa (type or alba).
16. Berberis stenophylla.
17. Berberis Darwinii.
18. Salix regalis.
19. Eulalia univittata.
20. If backed by wall, Choisya
ternata ; otherwise substitute
Golden Yew.
21. Clematis Jackmanni.
22. Clematis Jackmanni alba.
23. Clematis lanuginosa in
variety (over low larch sup-
ports).
24. Polygonum sacchaliense.
25. Golden Yew (several vars.).
26. Dimorphanthus mandschuri-
cus.
27. Heracleum giganteum.
28. Rose Mdme. Geo. Bruant.
29. Bambusas.
30. Eulalia.
31. Golden Yew.
32. Clematis, raised on rough
larch supports.
Note. — Numerous _ climbers,
tender or hardy, annual or peren-
nial, may well be introduced
among the foregoing, such as the
best climbing Tropzolums, Ipo-
mas, Convolvulus, Mina lobata,
Rhodochiton volubile, and many
others. The taller plants over
which these are allowed to clam-
ber must be carefully selected,
~1 o> Or
however, and be those which can
“hold their own ” against rampant
growth.
33. Yuccas.
34. Pink Japanese Anemone (A.
japonica elegans).
35 and 36. Border Carnations,
pink (say, Raby Castle), yel-
low (say, Sir Robert Peel or
Miss Audrey Campbell).
37. Polygonum compactum.
38. Pink Phlox decussata, e.g.
Eugenie, Beatrice, or other
fine variety of same colour.
39. White Phlox decussata, dwarf
variety.
40. Statice latifolia and Gypsoph.
paniculata.
41. Cannas, brought on in spring
in heat.
42. Funkia subcordata grandi-
flora; white, scented.
43. Tritoma Macowani and Inula
hirta.
44. Pink Hollyhocks.
45. Border Carnations: say, Old
Clove (maroon) and Miss Ellen
Terry (white).
46. Tritoma Pfitzeri and T. coral-
lina.
47. Dwarf Cannas.
48. Delphiniums, Belladonna and
magnificum (for late second
bloom); early summer bloom
may be disbudded.
49. Phlox decuss., Best Salmon-
coloured.
50. Ginothera missouriensis.
Note.—The backing of this
border (Nos. 1 to 32) has, like the
rest of this plan, been here com-
posed of tall subjects, i beauty
from August to October inclusive.
But it were better composed wholly
of evergreen plants in variety, if it
be necessary to hide a bare fence,
or to shelter on that side in winter
and spring the other occupants of
the border.
Comparison of the backing
used in this (autumn) border with
that in the preceding (spring) bor-
der may be suggested. Some may
find it well more or less to sub-
stitute the one for the other, at
least in part, when it is desired to
wy
HARDY-PLANT BORDERS.
44]
InpEx TO NumpBers on Tuirp PLan—(continued).
prolong the beauty or interest of
the border into the other season.
The ‘“Rockery edging’ in
this plan may be of the same
material as in the last. Thus,
however, its chief interest as re-
gards bloom would be in the spring,
though in respect of foliage its
beauty would be lasting. The
great majority of dwarf rock plants
bloom before autumn; but the
following, among others, may be
introduced for autumn flowering :—
Silene quadrifida and S. Schafta,
Autumn Crocus, Colchicums and
Sternbergias. Many annwals late
sown for the purpose, such as
Androsace coronopifolia, Papaver
alpinum and Lychnis Lagasce
(neither of these are annuals),
Papaver nudicaule and umbrosum,
and Berberis empetvrifolia.
51. Dahlia, e.g. Scarlet King,
Harpalium ‘“ Miss Mellish,”
Helenium superbum, and
Hel. striatum.
52. Phlox (decuss.) coccinea.
53. Henry Jacoby Pelargonium.
54. Red Opium Poppy and Ver-
bascums, e.g. V. phlomoides.
55. Lilium tigrinum.
56. Border Carnations, e.g. The
Spy (white), Hayes scarlet,
and Mrs. Reynolds Hole.
57. Hollyhocks.
58. Echinops Ritro.
59. Eryngium alpinum.
60. Eryngium giganteum (bien-
nial).
61. Helianthus multifl. major.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
7.
72.
73.
Eryngium Oliverianum.
Achillea Eupatorium (Parker’s
variety, 4 to 5 ft.).
Aster discolor
nanus), and
coccinea.
Tritoma Saundersi and Achil-
lea Eupatorium.
Astilbe rivularis.
Cistus ladaniferus
purpureus.
Dahlia.
Eryngium Oliverianum.
Crinum Powelli.
Cotoneaster horizontalis
(mossy Saxifrage below).
Coreopsis lanceolata.
Pyrethrum uliginosum.
(versicolor
Schizostylis
and C.
. Rudbeckia Newmanni.
. Helianthus multifi. flore pleno.
. Salvia splendens (greenhouse
in winter).
. Echinops Ritro (Blue Globe
Thistle).
. Aster Amellus major, and
Aster vimineus.
. Rubus canadensis rosea.
. White Japanese Anemone.
. Phlox decuss., best dwarf
vars. (Lemoine’s).
. Spirea, ‘‘ Anthy. Waterer.”’
. Red Opium Poppy (biennial).
. Hollyhocks (selected doubles).
. Achillea Eupatorium.
. Henry Jacoby Pelargonium.
. Actewa (Cimicifuga) cordifolia.
. Gypsophila paniculata.
. Alyssum argenteum.
. Aconitum autumnale.
. Border Carnations.
449 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID
BREEDING. —
By Mr. C. -C..-Honrst.
[Read Oct. 12, 1897.]
Durina the past few years the number of Orchid hybrids raised
by hand has increased by leaps and bounds, and with this
increase have come numbers of curiosities and mysteries which
seem to baffle us at every turn. Fortunately during the same
period much light has been thrown on the actual details of
fertilisation, and my object in these notes is to put on record in
a concise form a few of these curiosities, and at the same time
to view them in the light of recent researches. A careful study
of these curiosities suggests the desirability of working through
the normal up to the abnormal, and you will perhaps pardon me
if before dealing with the extraordinary I give you a brief out-
line of the ordinary facts of hybridisation, and then I think we
shall be better able to deal with ‘‘ Some Curiosities of Orchid
Breeding.”
HYBRIDS OF THE FIRST GENERATION.
Hybrids between two distinct species of Orchids are generally
intermediate in character between their two parents, and usually
are so intermediate as to be quite distinct from either.
For instance, the well-known garden hybrid Cypripedium
x Leeanum is fairly intermediate between its two parents,
C. Spicerianum and C. insigne, so much so that it is quite
distinct from either.
Sometimes one part of a hybrid appears to resemble one
paient more than the other; for instance, in C. x Leeanum the
upper sepal of the flower outwardly seems to resemble C.
Spicerianum more than C. insigne; while, on the other hand,
the staminode of the flower and the leaves and general habit of
the hybrid appear to incline towards C. insigne rather than
C. Spicerianum.
Yet Professor Macfarlane, of the University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, U.S.A., who has carefully worked out the minute
structure of this hybrid. found that even these parts were fairly
intermediate in character, though it was not so apparent to the
naked eye. (‘‘ Minute Structure of Plant Hybrids,” 7rans. Roy.
Soc. Hdin. 1891, xxvii., Part I., No. 14, p. 245.)
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 443
Professor Macfarlane found that the margin and inner
surface of the upper sepal of C. x Leeanum were both covered
with simple and glandular hairs side by side, while the parent
C. Spicerianum had glandular hairs only, and the parent
C. insigne simple hairs only; further, the hybrid had the ruby
hairs of C. Spicerianum along the midrib, though less in number,
and the glabrous spots of C. insigne, but reduced in size and
number. (Jd. p. 247.)
Again, the staminode of C. x Leeanum in colour and rough-
ness of surface outwardly resembles that of C. insigne, there
being no trace apparently of the purple and white smooth
staminode of C. Spicerianum (except the slightly modified shape),
but a section clearly showed a structure intermediate between
both parents, and a reduction by one half in the size of the
protuberances and in the number of hairs. (ld. p. 248.)
Further, though the leaves and the general habit of the
hybrid seem to incline towards the parent, C. insigne, yet Pro-
fessor Macfarlane observed that their inner structure was fairly
intermediate between both parents; curiously enough, in the
average number of stomata and epidermal cells the upper surface
of the leaf inclined considerably towards C. insigne, while
the under surface slightly leaned towards C. Spicerianum.
(Id. p. 245.)
Other hybrids have been examined minutely by Professor
Macfarlane, and all have more or less given the same results,
which thus show that the inner tissues, as well as the outer
characters, if carefully observed, are found to be fairly blended
between the two parent species.
A plate prepared by Professor Macfarlane shows this very
clearly. The beautiful colour of the hybrid Masdevallia x
Chelsoni and its two parents, M. Veitchiana and M. amabilis, is
due in a large measure to the crimson hairs which are distri-
buted thickly over the surface of the sepals. When magnified,
the hairs of M.. Veitchiana are seen to be globular in shape,
while those of M. amabilis are cone-shaped ; on the other hand,
the hairs of the hybrid are club-shaped, being intermediate
between the two and distinct from both. (Jd. p. 242, Plate VIL.,
figs. 3, 4, and 5.)
True hybrids between two distinct species are not found to
differ from one another more than individuals of a species are
K 2
444 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
wont to do. Thus Cypripedium Spicerianum crossed with
C. insigne always produces C. x Lecanum, whether from the same
seed-pod or from different seed-pods, and can never be mistaken
for anything else. Nor does it matter which way the cross is
made, whether C. Spicerianum be used as the seed parent
(C. Spicerianum ? x C. insigne ¢) or whether C. insigne be used
as the seed parent (C. insigne 2 x C. Spicerianum ¢) ; no matter
when or where they may be crossed (if proper fertilisation takes
place), they always produce C.xLeeanum. Hence we see the
great importance of having one recognised name, and one only,
for all hybrids between the same two species. (See my notes on
“Nomenclature of Orchids,” Orchid Review, iv. p. 165.)
Naturally, like species, hybrids from the same two species vary
considerably in minor details, especially in colour and size,
which, though of little importance to the systematic botanist,
yet make or mar a plant in the eyes of the Orchid grower; and
it is very necessary from an artistic and commercial point of
view that these colour and size variations should, when distinct,
bear a special name; but it is equally necessary that this name
should be a varietal one only, and not a specific one, in order
that the scientific nomenclature of hybrids be not tampered with.
These variations in hybrids of the first generation are
generally found to correspond with the varieties of the parent
species, and to have the same limited range. For instance, the
varieties of the hybrid C. x Leeanum are almost innumerable ;
but so are the varieties of one of its parents, C. insigne ; and it
is generally found that if the particular variety used as a parent
be a constant one, it will affect the hybrid offspring in a particular
way. For instance, to take two extreme cases, C. Spicerianum ?
x C. insigne Sandere ¢ (a very light form of C. insigne), raised
by Mr. Seden for Messrs. Veitch & Sons, of Chelsea, produced
GC. x Leeanum ‘ Prospero,’ a very light form of C. x Leeanum.
(Orch. Rev. v. p. 65, and R.H.S., January 12, 1897.) Again,
C. Spicerianum ¢ x C. insigne Wallacei dé (a heavily and densely
spotted variety of C. insigne), raised by M. Jules Hye, of Gand
Belgium, produced C.xLeeanum Albertianum, a heavily and
densely spotted variety of C.x Leeanum. (Cogn., Dict. Icon. des
Orch. February 1897, Cyp. hyb. pl. 3a.) If the particular
variety used be not a constant one, many variations will be
produced even from one seed-pod.
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 445
A few years ago Mr. Chas. Winn, of Selly Hill, Birmingham,
showed me a large number of C. x Leeanum in flower, which
were raised by him from C. insigne Chantini and C. Spicerianum.
Hardly any two plants were alike in colour or spotting, and they
also varied in the shape of the upper sepal, some being much
more reflexed than others; and one might easily have picked out
from this batch of seedlings many well-marked varieties, includ-
ing the typical C. x Leeanum, C. x L. superbum, and C. x L.
giganteum, to say nothing of intermediate forms and minor
varieties. We need not, however, be surprised at this when we
learn that one of the parents, C. insigne Chantini, though a well-
marked variety, is not a constant one from seed.
Mr. W. Grey, for Hon. Erastus Corning, Albany, New
York, U.S.A., raised seedlings of C. insigne Chantini fertilised
with its own pollen, and produced thirty different varieties from
one pod (Orch. Rev. ii. p. 227); so that C. insigne Chantini is
evidently a variety “with a past,’ and when crossed with
C. Spicerianum its history tends to repeat itself, and many forms
of C. x Leeanum are the result.
On the other hand, we know that some varieties are quite
constant from seed, for Mr. Norman Cookson, of Wylam-on-
Tyne, fertilised C. Lawrenceanum MHyeanum (a so-called
‘albino ’’) with its own pollen; and of the plants raised there-
from three have already flowered true to the parent variety
Gard. Chron. January 16, 1897, p. 37, fig. 8), so that C. L.
Hyeanum is evidently a variety *‘ without a past,’ and for a few
generations its history must have been regular and consistent:
it consequently breeds true to colour, and would no doubt set its
peculiar mark on its offspring if crossed with another species, in
the same way as we have seen that C. insigne Sandere has done
in C. x Leeanum ‘Prospero,’ and C. insigne Wallacei in C. x
Leeanum Albertianum.
REVERSE CROSSES.
It sometimes happens (especially when only a few plants have
been raised of a particular cross) that the reverse cross (B 9 x
A ¢ instead of A g x B ¢) produces hybrids differing in variety
from the original cross, and many people have immediately come
to the conclusion that this variation was due to the parents being
reversed. But, as can easily be perceived, this does not
446 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
necessarily follow. Post hoc certainly, but ergo propter hoc by
no means. This palpable fallacy is further exposed when we find
that many reverse crosses are not at all different ; for instance,
Mr. Seden, for Messrs. Veitch & Sons, crossed C. Schlimii ¢ with
C. longifolium ¢ and C. longifolium ¢ with Schlimii ¢, which
produced the well-known hybrid C. x Sedenii. ‘No perceptible
difference was observed between the plants raised from the two
separate crosses: they agree in habit, foliage, structure, and
colour of flower; in fact in every particular.” (Veitch, Man.
Orch. Part X. p. 148.) Instances like this completely dispose
of the theory that reverse crosses are intrinsically different.
A careful inquiry into the variations occasionally seen in
reverse crosses shows that they are mostly due to a different
variety being used as a parent in each case, the offspring varying
accordingly.
In the few cases in which the same variety has been used in
each case the variation is no doubt due to the variability of the
parent’s history, which is duly handed on to the offspring, and if
but one or two plants be raised from each cross the chances are
that the survivors will be widely different.
Theoretically, if every possible variety could be raised
between A 9 x B ¢ andbetween B 9 x A g¢ on comparison the
varieties of the former would be found to correspond with the
latter exactly. It would be difficult to demonstrate this in
Orchids, because out of thousands of individual seeds in a pod so
few plants are raised which arrive at the flowering age; but it
has been demonstrated in plants other than Orchids by the
experiments of careful observers. (Kerner and Oliver, ‘‘ Natural
History of Plants,”’ ii. p. 557.)
To sum up the ordinary facts of hybridisation :—
(1) Hybrids of the first generation between two distinct
species are generally intermediate between their parents.
(2) This applies to their inner structure as well as to their
outward characters.
(3) They are so far intermediate between their parents as to
be quite distinct from either.
(4) All hybrids between the two same species are specifically
alike, but like species differ in varietal characters.
(5) These varietal differences are found to correspond with
the varietal differences in the parent species.
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 447
(6) Whether these varietal differences are handed down truly
from the species to the hybrid depends upon the history of the
variety ; if constant it will hand it on truly, if variable it will
hand it on as variably.
(7) There is no intrinsic difference in reversed crosses.
POLLINATION AND FERTILISATION.
Having ascertained the ordinary results of the hybridisation
of two distinct species, it will perhaps clear the way still further
—
if ow $
Fie. 105.—Sopuro-CattLeya x Canypso (SoPHRONITIS GRANDIFLORA 9 x
CartLEyA Loppicest ¢). (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
if we briefly follow out the inner details of pollination and
fertilisation, having special regard to recent researches and
observations. So far as I know, the most recent work that has
been done in Orchids, in regard to the processes of fertilisation,
was carried out by Mr. Harry Veitch, F.L.S., 1885-87, the
results of which were published in the Journal of the Linnean
Society, vol. xxiv. No. 163, p. 395 (also in Veitch’s “ Manual
of Orchids,’ Part X. p. 88); and I am much indebted to Mr.
448 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Veitch for his invaluable observations. Mr. Veitch followed out
the inner processes from pollination to fertilisation in Cattleya
Mossie pollinated with its own pollen. The pollen masses were
applied in the usual way. ‘Two days afterwards the flower faded
and the pollen masses began to break up into groups of grains
and became thoroughly mixed up with the sticky fluid of the
stigma, and from some of the grains short tubes were already
pushed out. After six days the pollen tubes had largely in-
creased in numbers, and the longest had reached the base of
the column, having worked their way down the duct leading
through the middle of the column from the stigma to the seed-
chamber or ovary. During this time a wonderful change had
taken place in the ovary, or seed-pod. JBefore pollination it was
circular in shape; fourteen days later it was triangular and
swollen; and at the end of thirty days its walls were still more
swollen, and the ovules, the future seeds, were gradually develop-
ing into shape and form, though there were as yet no signs of
fertilisation. At the end of thirty days the pollen tubes had
entered the ovary, and were pushing down along its walls by the
side of the placentas which bore the ovules. After fifty-five days
the pollen tubes had reached the bottom of the ovary, and were
all among the ovules in countless numbers, but no signs of
fertilisation could be traced. Seventy-five days after pollination
Mr. Veitch found the tips of the pollen tubes in contact with the
opening leading into the ovule (micropyle), and at this time
actual fertilisation began to take place, changing the ovules into
seeds. 7
So far back as 18638 Dr. Hildebrandt made observations in
the Botanic Gardens at Bonn on the processes of fertilisation in
Orchids, somewhat similar to Mr. Veitch, but in different genera.
(Mohl and Schlectendal, Botanische Zeitung, 1863, Nos. 44
and 45.) Dr. Hildebrandt found that the period between pollina-
tion and fertilisation varied considerably in different Orchids : the
period in Dendrobium nobile he found to be about 120 days,
Phaius grandifolius sixty days, Cypripedium insigne 120 days,
while in hardy terrestrial Orchids, Listera ovata, Neottia nidus-
avis, and Orchis pyramidalis the period was but eight to nine
days, and Gymnadenia conopsea, Orchis morio, and O. maculata
about fourteen days. As far as I know, no one has carried actual
observations in the fertilisation of Orchids beyond this stage,
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 449
owing, no doubt, to the fact that the ovules of Orchids being so ©
minute, the further processes would be extremely difficult to
follow. Yet there can be little doubt that the further details of
fertilisation in Orchids (in common with those already observed)
are much the same as in other flowering plants. Indeed, the
ultimate processes of fertilisation seem to be much the same in
all forms of life. Professor Strasburger and others have worked
out the details of fertilisation with marvellous precision in a
plant of the genus Ornithogalum (Star of Bethlehem), which
belongs to the Liliacee order, a family closely allied to Orchids.
Professor Strasburger observed (Kerner and Oliver, ‘‘ Natural
History of Plants,’’ i. p. 416) that the pollen grain contained one
or two germ cells, which were made up of a nucleus surrounded
by a small portion of naked protoplasm. One of these germ cells,
or pollen cell, as we may conveniently call it, is carried along
near the tip of the pollen tube as it gradually lengthens, and
eventually is discharged from the tube through the opening of
the ovule into the embryo-sac. Having reached this, the pollen
cell at once makes for the egg cell contained therein, and, being
many times smaller than the egg cell, enters into it, the nucleus
of the pollen cell uniting with the nucleus of the egg cell, the
outcome being a fertilised egg cell which in due time becomes
the living embryo of the seed. In this way, by the union of the
pollen cell of the father with the egg cell of the mother, a new
individual is brought into being. We have already seen that
characters are handed on equally by both parents; therefore it
necessarily follows that in some way or other the determinants
of the characters of the father parent are packed up in the small
compass of the pollen cell, and those of the mother parent in
the egg cell.
We have seen that the pollen cell is many times smaller
than the egg cell, consisting as it does almost wholly of nucleus,
and we also know that the nuclei of both are fairly balanced in
size and contain the same elements. Therefore it naturally
follows that in the handing down of characters from one genera-
tion to another, the nucleus is the all-important matter, and the
surrounding protoplasm, which is so considerable in the egg cell,
and so inconsiderable in the pollen-cell, has little or nothing to
do with it, though no doubt it serves a useful purpose as a source
of food supply for the nuclei and the future embryo.
450 © JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Recent researches into the nature of the nucleus carried out
by Professor Weissmann and others tend to show that the most
important elements in its constitution are certain rod-like fibres,
looped threads, or round grains called ‘‘ chromosomes ”’ (idants of
Weissmann), which change their appearance and their position
from time to time, but which nevertheless generally remain
constant in number in the same species.
These are present in the nucleus of every cell, but in the
germ cells at the time of fertilisation, not only is their position
and shape altered, but their number is apparently decreased by
one half, and, according to Professor Weissmann’s interpretation
of the facts in his well-known book, ‘“‘ The Germ-Plasm ”’ (Con-
temporary Science Series), the essence of fertilisation consists in
the removal of one half of the nuclear elements from the egg cell
of the mother and the replacing of them by an equal number
from the pollen cell of the father, and in this way Professor
Weissmann accounts for the different phenomena of heredity,
reversion, and variation, and endeavours to make clear the many
mysteries of inheritance which have puzzled philosophers and
naturalists from Aristotle to Darwin.
Later researches seem likely to modify Prof. Weissmann’s
speculations considerably; but they are not yet sufficiently
advanced to form a definite opinion upon, and we must be
content to wait patiently for further facts.
Iam not aware that the number of nuclear fibres in the
cells of Orchids has yet been ascertained, but in the closely
allied order of Liliacew, in the plant Lilium Martagon, M.
Guignard has recently observed that while the ordinary cell
contained twenty-four nuclear fibres the ripe egg cell had but
twelve, apparently showing that it was ready for fertilisation.
(M. Guignard, Compt. Rend., May 11, 1891, and Nowv. Htudes
sur la Fécondation, ‘‘ Ann. Science Nat. Bot.’’ vol. xiv. 1891,
p. 168.) So that if we take Cypripedium x Leeanum as our typical
hybrid, we find that its nuclear fibres would be made up one
half from its parent C. Spicerianum and the other half from its
other parent, C. insigne; both the parents being pure species
their own nuclear fibres would of necessity be pure and true
(their ancestors for many generations having been the same
species as themselves). These nuclear fibres being, as we have
een, the bearers of the hereditary characters, and determining
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 451
the building up of the future individual, it is manifest that the
hybrid C. x Leeanum is of necessity an equal blending of its
two parent species.
CURIOSITIES.
Occasionally, when two species are crossed, the offspring
resemble the mother species only, having no trace of the father
species or any other modifying influence. I have found eleven
such cases recorded during the past four or five years, and
through the kindness of several correspondents and the editor of
the Orchid Review I am able to give details and particulars of
five of these cases.
(1) In May 1891 Mr. Reginald Young, of Sefton Park,
Liverpool, crossed Cypripedium barbatum ¢@ with pollen of
C. niveumdé. The pod duly ripened, and fourteen plants were
raised, of which nine have already flowered. Strange to say,
every one of the nine has flowered C. barbatum, like the mother
species, without a trace of the father parent, C. niveum, either
in the flowers or leaves. The same cross has been made at
least twice before by Messrs. Veitch & Sons (Gardeners
Chromcle, November 27, 1886), and by Mr. W. Bull, of
Chelsea (Gardeners’ Chronicle, December 20, 1888), both of
which produced the true hybrid C. x Tautzianum, and in which
the father species, C. niveum, was strongly represented in both
flower and foliage. (See col. fig. Reichenbachia, ii. t. 65.)
(2) Curiously enough, Mr. Young had a somewhat similar
experience with another cross. In March 1892 he crossed
C. callosum 2 with pollen of C. x microchilum, and in due time
twelve plants were raised, one of which flowered last May 1897,
producing two flowers on one scape, which were practically
indistinguishable from the mother species, C. callosum.
(3) Some years ago Mr. Charles Winn crossed a flower of
C. venustum ¢ with pollen of C. concolord. Highteen seedlings
were raised, five of which flowered pure C. venustum without a
trace of C. concolor. (Mv. Winn did not wait for the other plants
to flower, but threw them away.) (Orchid Review, iii.
p. 240; in litt., September 20, 1897.) The same cross
had been made before by Messrs. Veitch & Sons (Gardeners’
Chronicle, 1875, p. 804; Orchid Album, t. 418) and by Mr.
Robert Grey for Mr. H. Graves, of Orange, New Jersey, U.S.A.
(American Gardening, March 28, 1895), in both of which the
:
452, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
influence of C. concolor was very marked, the hybrid being
called C. x Marshallianum.
(4) In the Garden, May 26, 1888, the following note, signed
by “ W.,”’ appears :—‘‘ I recently saw in Mr. Buchan’s garden at
Southampton a very good seedling of Cypripedium (longifolium)
Roezlii, which had been obtained from the same pod of seed
which produced C. x Sedeni candidulum (C. (longifolium)
Roezlii¢ x C. Schlimii albiflorum d), evidently proving that all
the seeds were not crossed.”’
(5) Mr. George McWilliams, of Whitingsville, Mass., U.S.A.,
crossed C. Spicerianum ? with pollen of C. niveum ¢, and all of
the plants came true C. Spicerianum ; while at another time Mr.
McWilliams raised from C. niveum@? x C. Spicerianum ¢ seed-
lings which showed both parents distinctly. (In litt., Septem-
ber 20, 1897. See American Gardening, March 23, 1895.)
The same thing too has been observed and recorded in Lilies,
Begonias, Strawberries, and other plants; they have been called
“False Crosses.’”’ (See Gardeners’ Chronicle, Nov. 10, 1894,
p. 568.)
The first question that naturally arises when considering
these curiosities is, Are they true hybrids? Were the seeds from
which they were raised fertilised by the pollen of the foreign
species? Imfso, why are they not like the intermediate hybrids
raised before by others from the same cross, or, as in one case,
from the same seed-pod ? Now that we know something of the
actual details of fertilisation, we can confidently say that these
intermediate or true hybrids contained one half the nuclear
elements of the mother species and one half of the father species;
but can we truly say this of these curiosities? I think not. If
these curiosities reproduce the mother species simply, then they
must be made up of the nuclear elements of the mother species
only. In other words, they must either have been brought into
existence by self-fertilisation, or the ovules were developed
without the aid of pollen at all, which has been known to occur
at least once in an Orchid (Prof. Henslow, Structure of
Flowers, p. 171), which I will refer to in detail later on.
But all seeds produced without pollen (parthenogenesis)
always reproduce the mother plant exactly down to the smallest
detail, being nothing more nor less than seed-buds. But Mr.
Young writes :—‘‘ The plants of my C. barbatum ¢@ ©. niveum ¢
*
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 458
which have now flowered (nine in number), have not been exactly
alike, either in flower or foliage, nor exactly like the seed parent
C. barbatum : one plant has flowered with miserably small blooms,
much inferior to the parent C. barbatum, and this although other-
wise the plant appeared healthy and strong. ... One or two,
I may say two certainly, showed more white in the dorsal sepal
than the others, or than the seed parent, but not sufficient to
show as a C. barbatum ¢ C. niveum ¢ cross. The foliage, too,
varies slightly in substance and markings.” (In litt., September 8,
1897.) Mr. Young also tells me that the one plant of
C. callosum ¢ x C.xmicrochilum ¢, which flowered C. callosum,
is not at all like the mother variety in form. Mr. Winn writes
to me that the five plants of C. venustum 2 x C. concolor ¢
that he flowered ‘“‘each differed from the other slightly in
flower and leaf, but all were very bad C. venustum, . . . while
the mother plant was C. venustum Pardinum variety, a very
good form.”’ (In litt., September 20, 1897.) Mr. E.O. Orpett, of
South Lancaster, Mass., U.S.A.,informs me (in litt., September 24,
1897) that Mr. McWilliams’s C. Spicerianum ¢ » niveum ¢
seedlings, which ‘‘came true C. Spicerianum, differed much in
themselves, especially in some of them, being but poor forms,
while the mother plant was a superb form that I have not seen
equalled in other C. Spicerianum.”’
It is therefore evident that these curiosities were not pro-
duced without pollen, and we are consequently almost bound to
conclude that they were caused by accidental self-fertilisation.
It is difficult to say exactly how this happened, but Mr. Young
tells me that at the time (1891) his C. barbatum ¢? C. niveum ¢
cross was made he did not remove the pollen masses of the seed
parent C. barbatum ; and a short time ago I observed a flower
of C. Spicerianum, one pollen mass of which had fallen down,
and had stuck on the edge of the stigma, with the result that a
pod is now set. Ihave also frequently observed large spiders and
smaller flies settled on and crawling over the pollen masses of
Cypripediums, and it is just possible that the sticky pollen might
be carried on to the stigma in this way. With regard to the
pollen of the foreign species that was applied by hand, it would
no doubt fertilise some of the ovules, but the self-fertilised seeds
would have a better chance in the struggle for existence, and
would grow away quicker and stronger in the earlier stages than
. 106.—SopHro-CarrLeya x ExmM1A (CaTTLEYA Bowrtnciana ? x SOPHRONITIS GRANDIFLORA 6)
454 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
would the hybrids, especially those of C. niveum and C. concolor
parentage, which are known to be slow and “‘ miffy’’ growers; the
weaker would have to go to the wall, and the stronger would
survive.
HYBRIDS OF THE SECOND GENERATION.
Hybrid Orchids of the second and third generations are well ~
known to differ much in variability from those of the first gene-
(Journal of Horticulture.)
ration. Generally speaking, as we have seen, hybrids of the
first generation are uniformly intermediate, having a narrow
range of variation; whereas hybrids of the second and third
generations are very variable indeed, having a wide range of
variation, sometimes reverting wholly to the parent species or
parent hybrid, and occasionally even resembling a collateral
hybrid. The more hybrids are crossed with one another the
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 455
more related they become, and, consequently, reversions to
hybrids of the first generation, and indeed to pure species,
become more frequent. This of course acts as a reaction to
variation. .
With regard to the nomenclature of hybrids of the second
and succeeding generations, it is not necessary—indeed it would
not be wise—to give each distinct cross a distinctive name (as
should certainly be done in hybrids of the first generation), for
it is manifest that with such extraordinary variations and rever-
sions as occur from the same seed-pod in most hybrids beyond
the first generation, nomenclature would be reduced to an
absurdity by such a system. But each distinct form, if worthy
of a name, should be given a popular English one, like a Rose
or any other florist’s flower. It would no doubt be a great con-
venience to all if such names were made up of one word only,
and that ashort one. On the other hand, in the interests of
science, a careful record should be kept of the pedigree of each
plant for future reference.
CURIOSITIES IN SECOND GENERATION HyYBRIDs.
One of the most curious results on record in crossing Orchids
is that of Mr. W. Grey, for Hon. Erastus Corning, at Albany,
New York, U.S.A.
Mr. Grey crossed C. x Godefroye ¢ with pollen of C. niveum,
and from the same seed-pod is said to have raised C. concolor,
C. niveum, C. x Godefroy, C.xG. leucochilum, C. x G. pure-
white, C. bellatulum, and nearly fifty intermediate forms.
(Orchid Review, ii. p. 227.) At first sight this result appears
incredible, but when we remember how closely allied are the two
parents in both appearance and structure, not only to one
another, but also to C. concolor and C. bellatulum, we are not so
sure that it is impossible. The mother parent, C. x Godefroye,
was formerly thought to be a species ; but since it has been raised
twice by hand from C. concolor x ©. bellatulum, and all three
are known to grow near to one another, we must, I think,
consider it to be a natural hybrid.
Sir Charles Strickland, Bart., of Hildeney, Malton, Yorkshire,
showed at Royal Horticultural Society, May 14, 1895, ‘“ three
plants of C. concolor x C. bellatulum which closely resembled
C. x Godefroye.’’ One of these plants came into the possession
456 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of Capt. Schofield, New Hall, Hey, Rawtenstall, Manchester,
who says that “‘ it would be impossible to separate it from a fine
form of C.xGodefroye.’’ (Orchid Review, v. p. 75.) Again,
Mr. Statter, of Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester, showed
at Temple Show, Royal Horticultural Society, 1897, C. x conco-
bellatulum, which ‘“ resembled a form of C. x Godefroy with a
yellow ground, and from which it would be difficult to distinguish
it.” (Gardeners’ Chronicle, June 5, 1897, p. 418.) We know
that C. concolor and C. x Godefroye grow together in South
Siam (Garden, 1885, p. 342), and that C. bellatulum has also
been found in the same district (Ridley Jour. Linn. Soc. Bot.
xxxli. (1896), p. 415), so that it is quite possible for the natural
hybrid C. x Godefroye to result therefrom. The undoubted fact
too that C. x Godefroye is only imported in small numbers tends
to confirm this.
On June 15, 1897, Mr. H. Druce, of St. John’s Wood, showed
at Royal Horticultural Society C. x‘ Mrs. Druce,” raised from
C. niveum¢ xC. bellatulum g, ‘‘ the flower of which resembled
C. x Godefroye.”’ (Gardeners’ Chromcle, June 19, 1897, p. 411.)
We have already seen that C. concolor xC. bellatulum has
produced C.xGodefroye. These facts, therefore, suggest the
idea that C. niveum is but a geographical—probably an island—
form of C. concolor.
Viewed in this light Mr. Grey’s curious record may not
be so impossible as it seems. OC. x Godefroy =(C. concolor
+ C. bellatulum). Therefore C. x Godefroye 2 x C.niveum g
would represent (C. concolor + C. bellatulum) 2 x C. niveumé.
We have seen that C. niveum and C. concolor are very closely
allied, and we know from experience how extremely variable all
hybrids are after the first generation, and how common reversions
become, so that it may not be so impossible, after all, to raise
C. concolor, C. niveum, C. x Godefroye,C. x G. leucochilum,
C. x G. pure-white, C. bellatulum, and nearly fifty intermediate
forms from C. x Godefroy 2? x C. niveum ¢.
It would be very interesting if someone would repeat the
above cross and carefully record the result.
As with hybrids between species, so it is with crosses be-
tween varieties of the same species. For instance, Mr. Norman
Cookson crossed Dendrobum nobile nobilius ? with pollen of
D. n. Cooksoni, and from the same seed-pod flowered ‘“ some
;
:
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 457
good forms of each parent variety (z.e. D. n. nobilius and D. n.
Cooksoni), and a series of forms grading down to ordinary D.
nobile.”’ (Orch. Rev. ii. p. 168.) ‘In the progeny, all of
which bear very fine flowers, no two are alike: a few are almost
identical with D.n. Cooksoni, . . . a few are richly coloured like
D. n. nobilius, one is a fine white near to D. n. Schréderianum,
and all the forms and all the shades of colour are represented.”’
(Gard. Chron. March 28, 1896, p. 391.)
We know from importations recently made by Messrs.
Sander & Co. (‘Lang Tang’”’ vars.) that all these varieties of
D. nobile grow together in their native home, and therefore it is
reasonable to suppose that they frequently intercross, making
their history a very mixedone. We cannot, therefore, be surprised
at the result of Mr. Cookson’s experiment: their history being
so varied, their offspring tend to be as variable, the mixing by
crossing and the unmixing by many nuclear divisions causing
true reversions to occur from time to time.
Many curiosities of Orchid breeding have come to light during
the past few years, but they are getting so numerous now that
familiarity with them has bred indifference if not contempt.
For instance, the raising of Odontoglossum seedlings used to be
considered a rare curiosity, but recently more than half-a-dozen
have flowered, and we hear of numbers of seedlings fast growing
to maturity. Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the
flowering of Odontoglossum hybrids raised by hand is the direct
proof that they afford of the parentage of certain natural hybrids;
and Mr. R. A. Rolfe, of Kew, has been making a special study of
this interesting question with valuable results. Thus O.
crispum 2 x OQ. luteopurpureum raised by M. Leroy for Baron
Rothschild, of Paris, has proved the parentage of O. x
Wilckeanum; Messrs. Veitch’s O. nobile ? x O. triumphans
proved the parentage of O. x excellens; and Messrs. Linden’s
O. x cirrhosum ¢ x O. Hallii that. of O. x elegans. While,
on the other hand, we have the beautiful O. x crispo-Hallii
raised by Mr. Cookson which cannot occur in a wild state, one
parent growing in Colombia and the other in Ecuador.
The chief difficulty hitherto found in raising Odontoglossums
has been the rearing of the seedlings. I myself have had
thousands of good seeds which germinated but gradually died off.
L
458 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
STERILITY.
In other difficult subjects the trouble is to get pods to set at
all; thus Mr. Cookson tells us that he has never been able to get
a pod of good seed on Dendrobium Bensonie. (Gard. Chron.
February 27, 1897, p. 134.) Many Dendrobium species seem
difficult to fertilise, especially the evergreen section of the genus.
In 1892 Mr. W. H. White, for the President of the Royal
Horticultural Society, Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., of Burford,
pollinated over 100 flowers of D. fimbriatum, but not a single
seed-pod was obtained. (Orchid Rev. i. p. 17.) Mr. F. Moore,
of the Royal Infirmary, Liverpool, informs me that he has
managed to set pods on the following Dendrobiums this year :—
D. aureum ? x D. crepidatum roseum ¢, D. nobile @ x D.
Devonianum ¢, D. primulinum ¢ x fimbriatum oculatum ¢,
and D. clavatum ¢ x D.crepidatum roseum ¢ (in litt., Aug. 24,
1897). .
The nigro-hirsute section of Dendrobriums are well known to
be bad setters. Mr. R. Kichel, of Bradford, tells me that for
eight years he has failed to cross D. formosum with pollen of
the deciduous section, but he has now seedlings two-and-a-half
months old of D. formosum @ x D. nobile from four seed-pods
(in litt., Aug 15, 1897). This circumstance proves to us once
more how misleading and unsatisfactory purely negative results
are, and in this there is much hope for the future. However
many times a cross has failed to set, we can never be sure that
it may not be accomplished by someone. Very trifling conditions
seem to affect the delicate and susceptible organs of reproduction,
causing apparent sterility. For instance, it is said that Epiden-
drum ciliare can only be fertilised with success in the evening,
when the flowers begin to emit their fragrant perfume. (Orchid
Rev. v. p. 115.) (Mr. Harry Veitch tells me that this is not
so with him.) Again, Mr. Hichel has found E. vitellinum
very difficult to set seed, and still more difficult to raise plants ;
but Messrs. Veitch & Sons have flowered KH. radico-vitellinum,
and have a number of pods maturing at Langley. On the other
hand Messrs. Veitch have failed to set a pod on HK. radicans,
whereas Mr. Kichel tells me he has plants up of E. radicans 9
crossed with pollen of EK. Wallisii and Cattleya Bowringiana ; and
Messrs. Sander have also plants up of E. radicans ? x KE. Wallisil.
(Orch. Rev. v. p. 801.)
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 459
Darwin cites some very remarkable curiosities in sterility,
showing what slight causes affect the reproductive organs in the
genus Oncidium. (‘ Animals and Plants,” ii. pp. 114-116.) He
shows from the observations and experiments of Dr. Fritz
Miiller in Brazil that at least nine species of Oncidium, including
the well-known O. flexuosum, are perfectly self-sterile: they will
not set seed if pollinated with pollen off the same plant, and yet
they are perfectly fertile both in their pollen and their ovules
when crossed with a distinct species, or, most curious of all, if
pollinated with pollen of the same species but off a distinct indi-
vidual plant. For instance, on the stigma of O. flexuosum Dr.
Miller put the plant’s own pollen side by side with pollen of
another plant of the same species; in five days the latter was
quite fresh and yellow, while the former was dark brown and
decayed. Again, he placed on another stigma of O. flexuosum
pollen of a distinct plant of the same species side by side with
pollen from a distinct genus, Epidendrum: both behaved alike, _
and after eleven days could not be distinguished except by their
caudicles. Dr. Miller also found that the self-sterile pollen not
only turned brown and decayed itself, but that it also caused the
surface of the stigma to decay.
A few experiments carried out by myself at home confirm
those made by Dr. Miller in Brazil. I pollinated seventy-three
flowers of O. flexuosum with their own pollen: the stigma-
chamber folded itself up in every case and swelled slightly, but
in a few days withered from the stalk upwards and dropped
off. I had exactly the same result with O. incurvum, having
pollinated many flowers. In all cases the pollen decayed quickly.
It was different with O. flexuosum crossed with O. Forbesii: six
flowers only were pollinated and two of them set pods, one of
which burst prematurely and was full of chaffy seeds, while the
other opened properly 133 days after pollination, and on exami-
nation was found to contain a few good plump seeds, which
under the microscope appeared to be healthy living germs full
of green colouring matter. The seeds were very small and
round, hollowed out on one side, not unlike a shell: they were
duly sown on April 12 of this year, but as yet show no signs of
germination. I have also set three apparently good pods of O.
incurvum crossed with O. flexuosum, which have not yet ripened.
Hand-raised hybrids of Oncidium do not seem to have been
L2
460 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
flowered yet in this country, but I hope in the near future
attempts to raise them will prove more successful.
Tur INFLUENCE OF FOREIGN POLLEN ON THE RIPENING OF
SEED-PODS.
In the Orchid Review, iv. p. 41, Mr. T. L. Mead, of
Oviedo, Florida, U.S.A., writes :—‘I note a great difference in
the time required to ripen seed-pods, according to the species of
pollen made use of: it seems to tend to a mean between the
normal ripening time of the two parents.’ The writer gives
several curious and interesting facts in support of his opinion,
and in three cases at least there appears to be some ground for
the theory. On the other hand, Mr. Cookson writes (Orchid
Review, iv. p. 112):—‘‘ From careful observation I am strongly
of opinion that the period necessary to produce fertile seed
depends on the period usual with the mother parent, and that
the male parent has little to do with it.” In Orchid Review,
iv. p. 826, Mr. Mead gives some exceptions to his former theory,
and suggests that the influence of the foreign pollen may be
individual rather than general. For imstauce, ‘“ Lelia anceps
pollen seems invariably to cut down time needed to ripen pods
of Cattleya labiata group by about six months; while the pollen
ot C. labiata does not appreciably lengthen the time needed by
L. anceps pods toripen. . . . Broughtonia sanguinea, which both
with its own and with foreign pollen ripens its seeds in one-and-
a-half to two months, has power to quicken the ripening of
C. Bowringiana, with which it gave good seed in eight-and-a-
half months.” :
It seems to me that in the foregoing instances one of the
main factors in the period of ripening seed-pods has been over-
looked, and that is the time of the year when these experiments
were carried out. For instance, to take the case of L. anceps.
On January 22, 1896, I pollinated L. a. Sanderiana with its own
pollen; the seed-pod ripened good seed by June 15, 1896, or
145 days. On January 27, 1897, I crossed the same plant again
with its own pollen, and it did not ripen its seed-pod until July
14, taking 169 days, showing a difference in period of ripening
(for the same plant pollinated by same plant) of twenty-four
days in two different years. This seems to show clearly that
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 461
altogether, apart from foreign pollen, there are other disturbing
factors which must be taken into account when considering the
Fic. 107. Sopuro-Lauio-Catrieya x VertcHit (SOPHRONITIS GRANDIFLORA @ x
Lauio-CaTTLEYA x ELEGANS 6). (Gardeners’ Magazine.)
causes of lengthening and shortening period of ripening of seed-
pods in Orchids.
Mr. Reginald Young, of Sefton Park, Liverpool, has very
kindly placed at my disposal a copy of his interesting stud-book,
462 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
containing a complete list of his crosses in the Paphio-
pedium group of Cypripediums from 1892 up to August 31,
1897. On referring to this I find that Cypripedium barbatum
has been used twenty-two times as a seed parent, and has been
crossed nearly the year round from December to September.
In these twenty-two instances there was an extreme difference
between the longest and shortest period of ripening (from pol-
lination onwards) of 149 days, or about five months, the longest
time being 315 days, or ten-and-a-half months, and the shortest
period 166 days, or five-and-a-half months; so that the differ-
ence between the longest and the shortest was nearly as much as
the whole time of the shortest period. A further examination of
the facts and figures points to the conclusion that one of the
chief causes of the extreme difference lies in the season of the
year the cross was made, for the pod which ripened quickest was
pollinated on June 24; while that which ripened slowest was
pollinated on December 8; and between December and June,
with a slight exception or two, there was a gradual shortening of
the period of ripening, and from June to December a marked
lengthening of that period. The average period of ripening for
each month was as follows :—
December, 315 days; March, 234 days; April, 209 days ;
May, 216 days; June, 187 days; August, 210 days; September,
287 days. Thus it seems that the nearer to Midsummer the
flower was pollinated the quicker the pod ripened, and the
nearer to Christmas the slower the pod ripened; and I think
that there can be little doubt that this was due to the influence of
the sun at those different periods. Further it may be noted that
the pod which ripened slowest was formed and matured between
December 8 and October 19 of the following year; while the
pod which ripened quickest was formed and matured between
June 24 and December 7 of the same year. This seems to
suggest that the power of the sun is more essential in the early
stages of formation than at any other time. We have already
seen from Dr. Hildebrandt’s observations that in Cypripediums
some four months elapse between pollination and actual fertili-
sation, so that we may reasonably conclude that the growth of
the pollen tubes, and the conseguent fertilisation of the ovules, is
considerably hastened by the power of the sun; and I hope our
Italian friends will make use of the golden opportunities of
sunny Italy.
463
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING.
It is evident from this that any experiments undertaken to
test the influence of foreign pollen on the period of pod ripening
" must be carried out under the same conditions of light and heat.
On looking through Mr. Young’s records I found twenty plants
that had been crossed, which fairly well corresponded with the
above conditions. Each plant carried two pods (except one, and
that had three), which were both crossed at the same time, and
thus each pair of pods would be under fairly equal conditions
?
all round.
I have tabulated the results as follows :—
Eacu PAtIRm CROSSED WITH THE SAME SPECIES OR HyBRID.
Pollinated
Pod Ripened
Seed Parent Pollen Parent |
C. javanicum C. x Godefroye . | Aug. 9, 1893 . | May 29, 1894
C. x Godefroye . | Aug. 9, 1893 . | May 29, 1894
C. barbatum . C. niveum June 4, 1894 . | Dec. 24, 1894
C. niveum June 4, 1894 . Dec. 24, 1894
C. x superciliare . | C. bellatulum . June 15, 1894 | Jan. 29, 1895
~C. bellatulum . June 15, 1894 | Jan. 29, 1895
C. x cenanthum —C. bellatulum . July 23, 1894. | Feb. 6, 1895
C. bellatulum . July 23, 1894. | Feb. 6, 1895
C. x Ashburtonie. C. bellatulum . July 23, 1894. | April 15, 1895
C. bellatulum . July 23, 1894. | April 15, 1895
C. x calophyllum. | C. bellatulum . July 23, 1894. | April 22, 1895
C. bellatulum . July 23, 1894. | April 22, 1895
C.x Harrisianum .| C.niveum . Sept. 14, 1894 | Aug. 13, 1895
| C. niveum Sept. 14, 1894 | Aug. 13, 1895
|
C.x Harrisianum . | C. Sanderianum . | Sept. 14, 1894 | July 25, 1895
| C. Sanderianum . | Sept. 14, 1894 | Aug. 7, 1895
(13 days)
C. barbatum . | C. niveum May 29, 1895. | Dec. 7, 1895
| C. niveum . May 29, 1895. | Dec. 7, 1895
C. venustum d | C. x nitens. Dec. 14, 1895. | Dec. 2, 1896
| C. x nitens. Dec. 14, 1895. | Dec. 2, 1896
}
C. Appletonianum _ C. callosum. Jan. 15, 1896. | Dec. 16, 1896
Poyntzianum . _ C. callosum. Jan. 15, 1896. | Dec. 16, 1896
|
C. Lawrenceanum . ©. Mastersianum. | March 27,1896 Nov. 18, 189%
| C. Mastersianum .! March 27,1896 ' Nov. 18, 1896
C. bellatulum _C. x Harrisianum | May 26,1896. Dec. 3, 1896
| C. x Harrisianum | May 26, 1896. ' Dec. 3, 1896
464 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
In the above list we have thirteen plants, each bearing a pair
of pods, each pollinated on the same day, and each pollinated by
one species or hybrid, the result being that every pair but one
ripened on the same day; while in the exceptional pair there is
a difference of thirteen days between the ripening of each pod,
notwithstanding that the “pollen was taken from the same
plant, same scape, and probably the same flower ”’ (in litt.,
August 14, 1897).
Eacu Patr PoLuInaTED WITH TWO DIFFERENT SPECIES OR HyYBRIDs.
Seed Parent Pollen Parent Pollinated Pod Ripened Difference
C. x calophyllum . |C.Chamberlainianum| Dec. 8, 1894 | Oct. 31, 1895 0
C. Spicerianum .| Dec. 8, 1894 | Oct. 31, 1895
C. x Leeanum . C. x enanthum .|Jan. 1, 1895 | Nov.25,1895| 12 days
C. Boxalli . .|Jan. 1, 1895| Dec. 7, 1895
C. x nitens . C. x Canhamii . | Dec. 14, 1895 | Sept. 7, 1896| 63 days
C. x enanthum . | Dec. 14, 1895 | Nov. 9, 1896
C. x Williamsianum |C. x Calypso . | Jan. 15,1896 | Sept. 26, 1896 0
C. Boxalli . . | Jan. 15, 1896 | Sept. 26,1896
C. bellatulum C. Curtisii . . | May 26, 1896 | Mar.17,1897| 22 days
C. ciliolare . . | May 26, 1896 | Feb. 23, 1897
C. niveum . |C. x Rittelii . | May 26, 1896 | April 9,1897| 31 days
i barbatum . | May 26, 1896 | Mar. 9, 1897
In the above list we have six plants, bearing each a pair of
pods, each pair pollinated on the same day, but each pair with
two different species of pollen. The results are very interesting.
Four out of the six ripened differently in each pair, the period
varying from twelve to sixty-three days; in the other two each
pair ripened together. The most curious and puzzling result of
all was a plant of C. Lawrenceanum which carried three pods:
two crossed with C. Sanderianum and one with C. niveum, all on
the same day. There wasa difference of fifteen days in the two
pods crossed with C. Sanderianum, though the pollen was taken
from the “same plant, same scape, and same flower”; while,
strangely enough, the pod crossed with C. niveum ripened on
the same day as one of those crossed with C. Sanderianum.*
* C. Sanderianum was also the pollen parent in the one exception on
p. 463.—Eb.
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 465
Looking at these twenty instances as a whole, it seems quite
possible that the pollen parent has some influence on the period of
ripening of the seed-pod, though to what extent is not quite clear.
Further experiments and observations are necessary before
we can venture to determine the question definitely.
CROSSES BETWEEN DIFFERENT GENERA.
In 1887 Mr. R. A. Rolfe, of Kew, read a valuable paper before
the Linnean Society on “ Bigeneric Orchid Hybrids” (Jowrn.
Linn. Soc. xxiv. 160, p. 156). In this paper Mr. Rolfe gave a
complete list of generic hybrids which had flowered up to 1887,
and their number was then fifteen all told. A decade has passed
away since then, and the small band of fifteen has increased in
number to 118; and of these thirty-seven are generic hybrids of
the second generation, and one of these is a trigeneric hybrid
containing three genera.
I have prepared a list of generic hybrids made up to date, with
a reference to each, and the name of the original raiser.
LIST OF GENERIC ORCHID HYBRIDS.
(a) FLOWERED Hyprips.
(1) Cattleya x Lelia (Lelio-Catileya x).
C. x albanensis (L. grandis 9 x C. Warneri), Lindenia t. 466, Linden.
Cx Speen (L. crispa 2 x C. maxima), Gard. Chron. 1884, i. p. 109,
Veitch.
-C. x Aphrodite (C. Mendelii ? x L. purpurata), R.H.S., June 11, 1895, Lee.
-C. x Ascania (C. Triane 2 x L. Xanthina), R.H.S., April 25, 1893, Veitch.
-C. oo (C. Gaskelliana ? x L. Xanthina), R.H.S., Feb. 13, 1894,
Sander.
C. in (L. Dayana? x C. Loddigesii), Gard. Chron. Oct. 5, 1889,
Veitch.
C. x belairensis (C. Bowringiana ? x L. autumnalis), R.H.S., Oct. 27,
1896, Mantin.
C. x bella Age purpurata 2? x C. labiata), Gard. Chron. 1884, 1. p. 174,
Veitch.
-C. x Boylei (C. Triane 9 x L. anceps), R.H.S., May 23, 1894, Sander.
C. x Bryani (C. Gaskelliana? x L. crispa), R.H.S., Sept. 8, 1896, Cookson.
C. x callistoglossa (L. purpurata 9 x C. Warscewiczii), Gard. Chron.
1882, i. p. 76, Veitch.
C. x Canhamiana (L. purpurata 2 x C. Mossie), Gard. Chron. 1885,
il. p. 6, Veitch.
.-C. x Clivei (C. Dowiana ¢ x L. pumila), R.H.S., Aug. 29, 1893, Cookson.
C. x Cornelia (L. pumila 2 x C. labiata), R.H.S., Nov. 28, 1893, Veitch.
C. x Crispo-Warneri (C. Warneri 2 x L.crispa), R.H.S., Nov. 13, 1894,
Cowper.
C. x Decia (L. Perrinii 2 x C. Dowiana), R.H.S., Oct. 27, 1894, Veitch.
2a A aaa
am G ©. Gac0o0aa
‘
2 Ga0q OReoaaoaa
I ml mM ma mg Al a cg wk gl ma I re sl ald al ig ca oa ml oa
QA A
‘
hoe ep
ay ae ae
L.-C.
L.-C.
L.-C.
L.-C.
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
x Devoniensis (L. crispa? x C. guttata), R.H.S., Sept. 22, 1863, Veitch.
x Doris (L. harpophylla 2 x C. Trianz), Orch. Rev. ii. p. 79, Cookson.
x Electra (C. Percivaliana 2 x L. purpurata), R.H.S., June 9, 1896,
Ingram.
x Klsteadensis (C. bicolor 2 x L. xanthina), R.H.S., Aug. 13, 1895,
Ingram.
x Epicasta(L. pumila 2? x C. Warscewiczii),R.H.S., Aug. 29,1893, Veitch.
x Kumea (C. Triane 9 x L. majalis), R.H.S., Oct. 24, 1893, Veitch.
x Eunomia(L. Dayana? x C.Gaskelliana), R.H.S., Sept. 10,1895, Veitch.
x eximia (C. Warneri? x L. purpurata), R.H.S., June 24, 1890, Veitch.
x exoniensis (C. Mossie x L. crispa), Gard. Chron. 1867, p.1144, Veitch.
x Ghislainie (L. harpophylla 2? x C. amethystoglossa), Orch. Rev. iv.
p. 39, Imschoot.
. x Hippolyta (L. cinnabarina ? x C. Mossiz), R.H.S., March 29, 1890,
Ingram.
. x Highburiensis (C. Lawrenceana ? x L. cinnabarina), R.H.S., April 7,
1896, Chamberlain.
. x Horner (L. Perrinii x C. Percivaliana), R.H.S., Nov. 10, 1896, Ingram.
.x Hyeana (L. purpurata? x C. Lawrenceana), Soc. Roy. Flor. Brux.
Terv., May 9, 1897, Hye.
.xIngramiana (L. purpurata? xC. Dowiana), R.H.S., April 7, 1896,
Ingram.
.x Ingramii (L. Dayana? x C. Dowiana), R.H.S., July 13, 1892, Ingram.
.xintermedio-flava (C. intermedia x L. flava), Orch. Hyb. p. 265,
Fournier.
x Marriottiana (L. flava 2 x C.Skinneri), R.H.S., April12, 1892, Marriott.
x Maynardii(L. Dayana? x C. Walkeriana),R.H.S.,Feb.14,1893,Sander.
x Measuresii (L. xanthina 2 x C. dolosa), R.H.S., July 24, 1897, Sander.
x Meteor (L. Dayana x C. Bowringiana), R.H.S., Nov. 10, 1896, Ingram.
x Minerva (L. Perrinii x C. Lawrenceana), R.H.S., Nov. 10, 1896, Ingram.
.x Myra (C. Triane ? x L. flava), R.H.S., March 12, 1895, Veitch.
x Mylamiana (C. granulosa? x L. crispa), Gard. Chron. 1876, ii. p. 740.
. x Nysa (L. crispa ¢ x C. Warscewiczii), R.H.S., Aug. 25, 1891, Veitch.
x olivetensis (L. pumila x C. Leopoldi), Soc. Nat. Hort. France, July 22,
1897, Mantin.
. x Pallas (L.crispa 9 x C. Dowiana), R.H.S., Dec. 10, 1889, Veitch.
. x Parysatis (C. Bowringiana 9 x L. pumila), Orch. Rev. ii.p.310, Veitch.
. x Pisandra (L. crispa 2 x C. Eldorado), R.H.S., Oct. 24, 1893, Veitch.
. x Proserpine (L. Dayana 9 x C. velutina), Gard. Chron. 1890, p. 352,
Veitch.
.x Regine (L. purpurata? x C. Forbesii), Soc. Nat. Hort. Fr., July 22,
1897, Mantin.
. x Roeblingii (L. purpurata? x C. Gaskelliana), R.H.S., June 25, 1895,
Sander.
.x Rothschildi# (L. Perrinii 9 x C. Warscewiczii), Orch. Rev. iii. p. 353,
Veitch.
. x Sallieri (L. purpurata x C. Loddigesii), Journ. des Orch. vii. p. 290,
Maron.
. x Semiramis (L. Perrinii 2 x C. Gaskelliana), R.H.S., Nov. 12, 1895,
Veitch.
x Schrodere (C. Triane ? x L. Jongheana), R.H.S., Aug. 23, 1892,
Schroder.
x Statteriana (L. Perrinii? x C. labiata), Gard. Chron. Nov. 14, 1893,
Veitch.
x Timora (L. Dayana? x C. Lueddemanniana), Gard. Chron. Oct. 8,
1887, Veitch.
x Tresederiana (C. Loddigesii 9 x L. crispa), Gard. Chron. Feb. 4,
1888, Treseder.
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 467
L.-C. x Tydea (L. pumila? x C. Trianx), R.H.S., Feb. 13, 1894, Veitch.
L.-C. x Vedasti (L. pumila 2 x C. Loddigesii), L’Orchid. Feb. 1896, Perrenond.
L.-C. x Veitchiana (C. labiata x L. crispa?), Gard. Chron. 1874, i. p. 566,
Veitch.
L.-C. x Zephyra (C. Mendelii? x L. xanthina), R.H.S., July 24, 1894, Veitch.
In addition to the above there are thirty-six Hybrid Lelio-
Cattleyas of the second generation (2.e. Lelio-Cattleya x Lelia
and Lelio-Cattleya x Cattleya). For references see Hansen s
Orchid Hybrids, pp. 85, 249, 258.
(2) Cattleya x Sophronitis (Sophro-Cattleya x).
S.-C. x Batemaniana (S. grandiflora 2 x C. intermedia), Gard. Chron. Aug.
28, 1886, Veitch.
S.-C. x Calypso (S. grandiflora 2 x C. Loddigesii), Gard. Chron. Nov. 22,
1890, Veitch. (Fig. 105.)
S.-C. x eximia (C. Bowringiana ? x S. grandiflora), R.H.S., Sept. 24, 1894,
Veitch. (Fig. 106.)
(3) Cattleya x Brassavola (Brasso-Cattleya x).
B.-C. x Digbyano-Mossie (C. Mossie 2 x B. Digbyana), Gard. Chron. June
15, 1889, Veitch.
B.-C. x Digbyano-Triane (C. Triane 9 x B. Digbyana), R.H.S., April 3,
1897, Veitch. (Fig. 112.)
(4) Cattleya x Epidendrum (Epi-Cattileya x).
E.-C. x matutina (C. Bowringiana 9 x E. radicans), R.H.S. March 23, | 897
Veitch. (Fig. 108.)
(5) Lelia x Sophromtis (Sophro-Lelia x).
S.-L. x leta (L. Dayana? x S. grandiflora), R.H.S., Oct. 9, 1894, Veitch.
S.-L. x Marriotti (8S. grandiflora 9 x L. flava), R.H.S., Nov. 24, 1896, Marriott.
(6) Leha x Epidendrum (Hpi-Lelia x).
E.-L. x belairensis (L. autumnalis 9 x E. ciliare), Cogn. Chron. Orch. 1897,
p. 53, Mantin.
K.-L. x Hardyana (E.ciliare 9 x L. anceps), R.H.S., Nov. 13, 1894, Rothschild.
(Fig. 109.)
E.-L. x radico-purpurata (L. purpurata 9 x E. radicans), R.H.S., July 27,
1897, Veitch.
(7) Sophrontis x Epidendrum (Epuphronitis x ).
E.-S. x Veitchii (S. grandiflora ¢ x E. radicans), R.H.S., June 24, 1890, Veitch
(8). Phas x Calanthe (Phaio-Calanthe x ).
P.-C. x Berryana (P. Humbloti ? x C. Masuca), R.H.S., Nov. 26, 1895, Sander.
P.-C. x Brandtie (P. Wallichii ? x C. x Veitchii), R.H.S., Feb. 9, 1897, Sander.
P.-C. x insperata (P. grandifolius 9 x C. Masuca), Man. Orch. 1894, p. 146,
Veitch.
P.-C. x irrorata (P. grandifolius 2? x C. vestita), Gard. Chron. 1867, p. 264,
Veitch.
P.-C. x Sedeniana (P. grandifolius 9 x C.x Veitchii), Gard. Chron. Feb.
1887, Veitch.
468 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
(9) Zygopetalum x Colax (Zygo-Colax x).
Z.-C. x leopardinus (Z.maxillare 2? x C. jugosus), Gard. Chron. 1886, p. 199,
Veitch.
Z.-C. x Veitchii (Z. crinitum 2 x C. jugosus), Gard. Chron. i. p. 765, 1887,
Veitch. (Fig. 110.)
(10) Anectochilus x Hemaria (Anectomaria x ).
A. x Domini (A. Lobbianus ? x H. discolor), Proc. R.H.S. v. 1865, p. 139,
Veitch.
(11) Hemaria x Macodes (Macomaria x ).
M. x Veitchii (H. discolor ? x M. Petola), Proc. R.H.S. ii. 1862, p. 546, Veitch.
(12) Hemaria x Dossinia (Dossinimaria x).
D. x Dominii (H. discolor 9? x D. marmorata), Gard. Chron. 1861, p. 531,
Veitch.
(18) Sophronitis x Lelio-Cattleya x (Sophro-lelio-Caitleya x ).
8.L.C. x Veitchii (S. grandiflora 2 x L.-C. x elegans), R.H.S., Sept. 6, 1892,
Veitch. (Fig. 107.)
(6) GmNERIC CrossES FLOWERED Morner Genus.
(1) Zygopetalum x Odontoglossum.
. Mackayi? x O. bictonense, Seden for Veitch (in litt., Sept. 25, 1897).
. Mackayi? x O. crispum, Seden for Veitch (in litt., Sept. 25, 1897).
. Mackayi? x O. grande, Seden for Veitch (in litt., Sept. 25, 1897).
. Mackayi? x O. nobile (Pescatorei), Seden for Veitch (in litt., Sept. 25),
1897; Treseder for Heath (in litt., Sept. 4, 1897).
NNNWN
(2) Zygopetalum x Oncidiwm.
Z. Mackayi¢ x O. unguiculatum, EHichel (in litt., June, 1897) (cf. Horner, in
litt., Sept. 9, 1897).
(8) Zygopetalum x Lycaste.
Z. Mackayi? x L. Skinneri, Seden for Veitch (in litt., Sept. 25, 1897).
(All the above flowered Zygopetalum Mackayi pwre and simple.)
(4) Phragnupedium x Paphiopediwm.
(South American x East Indian Cypripedium.)
Phrag. longifolium ? x Paph. Stonei, Grey in Orch. Hyb. p. 189.
(Flowered Phrag. longifolium.)
(c) UNFLOWERED Hyprips.
Bletia x Lelia (B. verecunda 2 x L. purpurata), Mead, Orch. Rev. iv. p. 42.
Bletia x Schomburgia (B. verecunda ¢ x S. tibicinis), Mead, Orch. Rev. iv.
p. 42.
Bletia x Phaius (B. catenulata? x P. grandifolius), Hodgkinson, Orch. Rev.
iv. p. 334.
Bletia x Celogyne (B. hyacintha ? x C. cristata), Eichel, Orch. Rev. vy.
p. 140 (Moore, in litt., Aug. 31, 1897).
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 469
Epidendrum x Phaius (K. atropurpureum ? x P. grandifolius), Berkeley,
Orch. Hyb. p. 322.
Epidendrum x Zygopetalum (Z. Mackayi? x EH. ciliare), Horner in Garden,
Nov. 2, 1892.
Epidendrum x Dendrobium (E. x O’Brienianum ° x D. erystallinium), Orch.
Rev. ii. p. 292, Statter.
Cattleya x Sobralia (S. macrantha 2 x C. Warscewiczii), Chamberlain, Orch.
Rev. i. p. 366.
Sophronitis x Brassavola (S. grandifolia ¢ x B. glauca) (Orpet, in litt.,
Sept. 1897).
Mazillaria x Lycaste (M. Sanderiana ? x L. Skinneri) (Eichel, in litt.,
Sept. 1897).
Diacrium x Epidendrum (D. bicornutum? x E. radicans), Sander, Orch.
Rev. v. p. 301.
Cattleya x Phragmipediwm (Charlesworth, in litt., Oct. 1897).
Lelia x Phragmipedium (UL. cinnabarina 9 x P. x Sedeni) (Hichel, in litt.,
Sept. 1897 [8 lots]).
Paphiopedium x Cypripedium (HK. Indian x Hardy Cypripedium) (P.
Lawrenceanum ? x C. spectabile), Frébel, Gard. Chron. Oct. 2, 1897.
Paphiopedium x Phragmipedium.
(E. Indian x S. Americ. Cypripedium.)
Paph. Curtisi? x Phrag. longifolium, Marwood, Gard. Chron. July 8, 1893.
Phrag. caudatum ¢ x Paph. barbatum, Veitch, R.H.S., May 12, 1885.
Paph. callosum ? x Phrag. caudatum, Lutwyche, Orch. Rev. ii. p. 19.
Paph. Parishii? x Phrag. caricinum, Swan, Orch. Rev. 1i. p. 171.
Phrag. x Sedeni? x Paph. Stonei [(1) Statter, in litt., Aug. 1897]; (2) Hurst,
Oct. 1897.
Paph. Spicerianum ? x Phrag. Schlimii, Hurst, 1897.
Paph. Spicerianum ? x Phrag. x Sedeni, Treseder, Orch. Hyb. p. 188.
Phrag. x Dominianum 2 x Paph. Chamberlainianum, Swinburne, Gard.
Chron. Oct. 1896, p. 435.
Paph. x Ashburtonie 2 x Phrag. x calurum, Winn, 1896.
Paph. venustum 2? x Phrag. Schlimii, Winn, 1896.
Paph. bellatulum 2 x Phrag. x Sedenii, Winn, 1896.
Phrag. x cardinale 2? x Paph. Spicerianum, Hurst, Oct. 1897.
(d) Goop SEEDs.
Cattleya x Broughtonia (C. Bowringiana 9 x B. sanguinea), Mead, Orch.
Rev. iv. p. 326.
Epidendrum x Odontoglossum (E. vitellinum ? x O. crispum), Eichel, Orch.
Rev. v. p. 115.
Bletia x Calanthe (B. hyacintha? x C. Masuca), Veitch, Orch. Conf. 1885.
Acanthepippium x Chysis (A. Curtisi 2 x C. bractescens), Veitch, Orch. Conf.
R.H.S., 1885, p. 35.
Chysis x Mormodes (C. aurea? x M. Pardinum) (Moore, in litt., August,
1897). -
Chysis x Zygopetalum (C. aurea? x Z. x Sedeni), Veitch, Orch. Conf. 1885.
Lelia x Paphiopedium (i. cinnabarina? x Paph. Boxalli) (Hichel, in litt.,
Sept. 1897).
Paphiopedium x Cypripedium (EK. Indian x Hardy Cypripedium), P. Exul ? x
C. Calceolus), Hurst, Orch. Rev. v. p. 365.
Cypripedium x Phragmipedium (Hardy x 8S. American Cypripedium (C
Calceolus 2 x Phrag. x Sedeni), Hurst, Orch. Rev. v. p. 365,
470 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Lephupedium Gprpedum
~ Figainsed tna
DiaGRaAM SHOWING HOW 26 GENERA HAVE BEEN LINKED TOGETHER BY
HYBRIDISATION IN GARDENS,
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. ry be
Curious GENERIC Hysrips.
(1) Sophronitis x Epidendrum.—Epiphronitis x Veitchii is an
interesting hybrid out of Sophronitis grandiflora ¢ by Epidendrum
radicans ¢. It was first raised and flowered by Mr. Seden for
Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons in 1890. The parents of this hybrid
not only belong to distinct genera, but are markedly different
both in size and habit, the father parent growing as many feet
high as the mother parent grows in inches; the former a native
of Mexico and Guatemala, and the latter of Southern Brazil.
The hybrid is more curious still, the influence of the Kpidendrum
parent being overwhelming; the reed-like stems, with air-roots,
show no trace of the Sophronitis parent, being exactly like
Epidendrum, and in the flower there is hardly a trace of the
peculiar structure of Sophronitis; but, on the other hand, one
can see at a glance that some modifying influence has been at
work: the flowers are darker in colour, the pedals are broader,
the lip is less toothed, broader, and not so deeply cleft, the crest
has more yellow colour, two smaller tubercles, and a shorter
keel—all of which are consistent with the influence of Sophronitis.
But anyone not knowing the parentage of the hybrid would call
it a large-flowered and highly coloured form of Epidendrum
radicans (col. fig. “‘ Revue Horticole,’’ October 16, 1896, p. 480).
(2) Cattleya x Hpidendrum.—Hpi-Cattleya x matutina isa
curious hybrid out of Cattleya Bowringiana ¢ by Epidendrum
radicansg@. (Fig.108.) It was raised and flowered by Mr. Seden
for Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons, and was shown in March 23,
1897. Like Epiphronitis x Veitchii, this hybrid closely
resembles Epidendrum radicans both in habit and flowers, there
being but few traces of the mother parent Cattleya-Bowringiana.
But it is said that the reed-like stems show a slight tendency to
thicken at the base; the colour of the sepals and petals, too, is
much lighter than in Epidendrum radicans, being yellow tinged
with vermilion ; the lip is broader, ovate, and notched instead
of three-lobed.and toothed ; otherwise the hybrid would easily
pass for a large-flowered and light-coloured form of Kpidendrum
radicans.
(8) Lelia x Epidendrum.—Epi-Lelia x radico-purpurata is
a beautiful hybrid of the same class out of Lelia purpurata ¢
by Epidendrum radicans ¢, and like the other two was raised by
Mr. Seden for Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons, and was shown
Fic. 108.—Ep1-Carrneya x MATUTINA (CATTLEYA BowRInaIaANnA 9 x EPIDENDRUM RADICANS 3).
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.) |
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 473
at R.H.S. on July 27,1897. This hybrid again shows the predomi-
nating influence of the Epidendrum parent, though the Lelia
parent is rather more perceptible than in either Epiphronitis x
Veitchii or Epi-Cattleya x matutina. The reed-like habit and
the adnate column are those of Epidendrum, while traces of
the Lelia are to be seen in the slightly recurved leaves, larger
flowers, sepals and petals modified in colour to a light flame
yellow ; the lip is broadly ovate and nearly entire with a broad
band of purple around two lemon yellow eyes, with a three-
keeled crest between. Thus in essential structure the hybrid
corresponds with Epidendrum radicans, yet from a horticultural
point of view it is far superior in every way.
In all three hybrids, between Sophronitis and Epidendrum,
Cattleya and Epidendrum, and Lelia and Epidendrum, we find
the Epidendrum parent so largely and overwhelmingly the
predominant partner that did we not know we could never have
guessed the other parent.
It will be noticed that the Epidendrum parent is the
same species (EK. radicans) in each of the three cases, and at
first sight it might be thought that this species was, in some
way or other, naturally prepotent over other species; but we
know that this is not so, for when E. radicans is crossed with
EK. xanthinum the offspring E. x Dellense is intermediate in
character, slightly inclining to E. xanthinum (Orch. Rev. i.
p. 824); and EK. radicans crossed with E. evectum produces
E. x O’Brienianum, the colour of which is intermediate, but
the shape resembling E. evectum (Orch. Rev. i. p. 227). It is
evident, therefore, that E. radicans is not always predominant
when used as a parent.
The genus Epidendrum contains a large number of species,
which fall naturally into at least two distinct groups.
(1) Eu-epidendrum of Bentham and Hooker, ‘‘ Genera Plan-
tarum,”’ iil. p. 529 (1883). (a) Column and lip wholly adnate ;
(b) Stems reed-like.
(2) Other groups of Bentham. (a) Column and lip partly
adnate; (6) stems thickened or swollen into pseudo-bulbs.
It will be noted that these two groups are very distinct in
structure, almost distinct enough to be classed as two genera;
and further it is apparent that both in freedom of column and
lip and in swollen stems the second group approaches Lelia,
M
sl
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 475
Cattleya, and Sophronitis, forming as it were a connecting link
between them and the reed-like Epidendra. Indeed, recent
results of hybridisation seem to show that the second group of
Epidendrum is more closely allied to Cattleya, Lelia, and
Sophronitis than to the first group. Thus H. ciliare of the second
sroup when crossed with Lelia anceps and L. autumnalis pro-
duces ordinary hybrids fairly intermediate in character (Hpi-
Lelia x Hardyana and H.-L. x belairensis respectively) ;
whereas when E. vitellinum of the second group is crossed with
E. radicans of the first group the result is similar to crossing
E. radicans with Sophronitis, Cattleya, and Lelia—namely, a
slightly modified E. radicans (the only traces of the mother
parent E. vitellinum being a slightly glaucous tint of the leaves,
a tendency of the reed-like stems to enlarge at the nodes,
together with irregularly modified flowers EK. x radico-vitellinum
O’Brien, Gard. Chron. July 10, 1897, p. 16).
To sum up briefly we find that—
(1) Cattleya, Lelia, Sophronitis, and the pseudo-bulbous
Epidendra when intercrossed produce normal hybrids inter-
mediate in character.
(2) The reed-like Epidendra when united with one another
also produce ordinary hybrids intermediate in character.
(8) But when the reed-like Epidendra are crossed with the
pseudo-bulbous Epidendra or with Cattleya, Lelia, and Sophro-
nitis abnormal hybrids are produced having the essential
characters of the reed-like Epidendra.
And, having regard to recent researches into the nature of
fertilisation, we are almost bound to conclude that Cattleya,
Lelia, Sophronitis, and the pseudo-bulbous Epidendra contain
in their germ-cells some nuclear particles of the reed-like
Epidendra.
These remarkable curiosities in Orchid breeding therefore
go far to prove that not only are the pseudo-bulbous Epidendra
(like E. vitellinum) descended from a reed-like Hpidendrum
ancestor, but that it is highiy probable that Sophronitis grandi-
flora, Lelia purpurata, and Cattleya Bowringiana are also so
descended.
This opens up a wide field for the student of evolution—a
field into which we cannot enter now, being beyond the scope of
these notes.
M 2
476 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
PREPOTENT GENERIC CROSSES.
Certain crosses between distinct genera have, curiously
enough, flowered the same genus and species as their mother
parent. The following is a complete list so far as I have been
able to ascertain :—
PHRAGMIPEDIUM X PAPHIOPEDIUM.
(South American Cypripedium x E. Indian Cypripedium.)
(1) Phrag. longifoliwm Hartwegii 2? x Paph. Stonei g.
Raised by Mr. R. M. Grey for Mr. Graves, Orange, Mass.
“The plant resembled the seed-bearing parent very closely.’
(Hansen, “ Orchid Hybrids,”’ p. 189.)
ZYGOPETALUM X ODONTOGLOSSUM.
(la) Z. Mackayi? x O. nobile (Pescatorei) 3.
‘‘ A few seedlings raised by Mr. Seden for Messrs. J. Veitch
& Sons, all of which flowered pure Z. Mackayi.”’ (In litt.,
September 25, 1897.)
(1b) The same cross was made by Mr. Treseder at Messrs.
Heath & Son, of Cheltenham. ‘ About 800 seedlings were
raised, and about twenty plants flowered pure Z. Mackayi.”’
(In litt., September 4, 1897.)
(2) 7. Mackayi 2? x O. crispum 2.
(3) Z. Mackayi 2 x O. grande é.
(4) Z. Mackayi 9 x O. bictonense 6.
‘A few seedlings of each cross’’ were raised by Mr. Seden
for Messrs. Veitch & Sons. “All of which flowered pure Z.
Mackayi.’’ (In litt., September 25, 1897.)
ZYGOPETALUM X ONCIDIUM.
(la) Z. Mackayi 2 x O. unguiculatum $. A plant raised
in Florence, Italy, by a friend and correspondent of Mr. Hichel,
of Bradford, ‘‘ has flowered pure and simple Z. Mackayi.”’
(1b) Rey. F. D. Horner, of Burton-in-Lonsdale, Kirkby
Lonsdale, tells me that he had three seedlings of this same cross,
which he grew for four to five years, but they unfortunately died
before flowering ; “but the plants seemed the fac-simile of Z.
Mackayi in both bulbs and foliage. .. . All experts who saw them
called them Z. Mackayi plants.” (In litt., September 9, 1897.)
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 477
ZYGOPETALUM X LYCASTE.
(1) Zygopetalum Mackayt 2? x Lycaste Skinnert . “ A few
seedlings,’ raised by Mr. Seden for Messrs. Veitch & Sons,
‘* which all flowered pure Z. Mackayi.” (In litt., September 25,
1897.)
These curious generic crosses are particularly interesting, and
are perhaps the strangest in the history of hybridisation. They
are analogous to the three curious offspring of Epidendrum
radicans mentioned above, being similar in some respects, but
they are not parallel cases, because in other respects they differ
much. In the offspring of E. radicans some traces of modification
are apparent to the most casual observer, but in these there does
not seem to be the faintest or slightest trace of the other parent.
In the offspring of E. radicans the father parent was the pre-
dominant one, and therefore there could be no chance of
accidental self-fertilisation or parthenogenesis, whereas in these
we are now dealing with it is the mother parent which is all
powerful; and it is quite open for the sceptic to suggest that
these curious results are due to self-fertilisation, or that they
were produced without the aid of pollen. But, on the other
hand, it is easy to show that self-fertilisation is out of the
question in all these crosses, and that in the Zygopetalum
crosses, at all events, parthenogenesis is equally out of court.
With regard to self-fertilisation :—(a) Mr. Grey writes
that in his Phragmipedium x Paphiopedium “ the pollen was
removed from the seed-bearing plant before the flower was fully
expanded.” (‘‘ Orchid Hybrids,’ p. 189.) (b) Zygopetalum x
Odontoglossum and Lycaste. Mr. Seden writes: “1 am quite
sure the pollen was removed from the Z. Mackayi in every case.”
(c) Zygopetalum x Oncidium. Mr. Hichel writes: ‘‘I have so
much confidence ... that the probabilities of self-fertilisation of
the Zygopetalum flower is out of the question,’”’ and Rev. F. D.
Horner writes : ‘Iam confident of one thing, and that is that no
pollen of the seed-parent (the Zygopetalum) had any part in the
pruduction of these seedlings.’’ So that in all these cases it is
manifest that self-fertilisation is a broken reed to lean upon for
an explanation.
Perhaps I might here point out the difference between these
cases and the Cypripedium curiosities mentioned before, which |
have attributed to accidental self-fertilisation.
478 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
These nine cases are all that have been tried between these
genera, so far as we know, and all have had the same result,
being the rule and not the exception; whereas the Cypripedium
cases were but a few curiosities out of hundreds of normal
hybrids, and therefore the exception rather than the rule. With
regard to the suggestion of parthenogenesis I cannot deny that
Mr. Grey’s cross between Phragmipedium and Paphiopedium
might possibly be due to this, especially as the plant closely
resembled the mother parent variety as well as species, and only
differed but slightly in size of flower. Parthenogenesis, or the
production of fertile seeds in a pod without the aid of pollen,
is well known to occur in certain plants (see Kerner and Oliver,
‘‘Natural History Plants,” 1. p. 469; Gardeners’ Chronicle,
August 23, 1890, p. 218) ; and Prof. Henslow in his “ Structure
of Flowers,’ p. 171, refers to an interesting discovery acci-
dentally made by Dr. Treub. Dr. Treub found a larva of an
insect in the ovary of a Mauritian Orchid, Liparis latifolia: it did
not injure either the ovules or the ovary, but seemed to feed on
the juices secreted by the ovarian cavity. In this cavity, without
the aid of pollen, the ovules developed and became covered with
seed-coats, as if under the influence of pollination, so that the
irritation of the larva determined the development of the ovules
in the same way that the pollen tubes would have done.
This possibly may have happened with Mr. Grey’s plant. The
pollen tubes of Paph. Stonei may have irritated and developed
the ovules by feeding on the juices of the pod, and in some way
failed to fertilise the egeg-cell, the result being a seed-bud
developed within the pod bearing the characters of the mother
species and the mother variety. But it is not fair or proper to
generalise from an isolated instance like this; we must wait
patiently for further results before we attempt to assign or
determine the real cause of this curiosity.
But in the case of the Zygopetalum crosses we can make
more sure of our ground. If these were caused by parthenogenesis
all the plants would be alike from one pod; but this was not so,
for Mr. Seden writes to me that “all the seedlings varied, the
same as all imported plants in size and colour,”’ and we know
that one of Mr. Treseder’s plants differed in colour from its
birth-mates, ‘‘the lip being almost wholly white, with a few
slight purple marks at base and centre, and the margin was
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 479
more wavy in outline’ (shown at Royal Horticultural Society,
December 15, 1896).
Therefore it is manifest that neither self-fertilisation nor
parthenogenesis will hold good in these cases. Nor can they be
due to the natural prepotency of Z. Mackayi as a parent, for we
Fre. 110.—Zyeo-Conax x VerTcum (ZyYGoPETALUM CRINITUM? x CoLax
Jucosus ¢). (Jowrnal of Horticulture.)
know of three other hybrids at least, having Z. Mackayi as a
parent, which are all fairly intermediate in character:—(1) Z. x
Sedenii (Z. maxillare @ x Z. Mackayi 3), Veitch, Gardeners’
Chronicle, 1874, p. 290. (2) Z. x leucochilum (Z. Mackayi
intermedium ¢ x Z. Burkei 3), Orchid Review, iv. p. 62.
480 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
(3) Z. x Perrenoudi (Z. Mackayi intermedium ¢ x Z. Gauthieri ¢),
Dict. Icon. Orch. Zygo. hyb. pl. 1.
Nor can it be said that Zygopetalum as a genus is prepotent
over other genera, for twice it has been crossed with Colax, and
in both cases true hybrids, intermediate in character, have been
raised.—(1) Zygo-Colax x Veitchii, Rolfe in Linn. Soc. Jour.
xxiv. p. 170. (Fig.110.) (Z.crinitum 9 x C.jugosus.) (2) Zygo-
Colax x leopardinus (Z. maxillare ¢ x C. jugosus ¢), Reich.
Gardeners’ Chronicle, 1886, i. p. 199.
So that, as far as our present knowledge goes, we can only
account for the prepotency of Zygopetalum over Odontoglossum,
Oncidium, and Lycaste in the same way that we have had to
explain the predominance of Kpidendrum over Cattleya, Lelia,
and Sophronitis, namely, that in the germ-cells of Odonto-
glossum, Oncidium, and Lycaste there must be a certain propor-
tion—a large proportion in these cases—of unmodified nuclear
particles of Zygopetalum, and that, therefore, Zygopetalum is
the common ancestor of Odontoglossum, Oncidium, and Lycaste,
and that the three latter genera are more recent in their origin
than the ancestral genus Zygopetalum. A somewhat interesting
confirmation of this in regard to Odontoglossum, at any rate, is
the fact that the seedling Odontoglossums raised by M. Leroy
for Baron Rothschild, of Paris, “‘ during the first eighteen months
of their growth resembled Zygopetalum more than they did
Odontoglossum.”’ (‘‘ Orchid Hybrids,” p. 226.) Students of em-
bryology will appreciate this fact, for it is well known to them
that all living beings tend to resemble their ancestors in the
early stages of their development.
Curious CROSSES.
In the Orchid Review for June 1897 I recorded a few curious
generic crosses made by me during the early part of this year,
with the results up to June 1. I venture to repeat them here
with their progress up to date.
(1) Lycaste Skinneri @ x Lelia anceps Sanderiana ¢.
Crossed February 15, 1897. A healthy-looking pod 5 inches in
oirth.
(2) Lycaste Skinneri 9 x Brassavola glauca dé. Crossed
lebruary 15, 1897. A good-looking pod 5 inches in girth.
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 481
- (8) Cypripedium Calceolus 2 x Phragmipedium x Sedenii
candidulum ¢. Crossed March 18, 1897. Pod ripened August 15,
1897 ; 166 healthy seeds. (Orch. Rev. v. p. 365.)
(4) Paphiopedium Exul 2 x Cypripedium Calceolus ¢. Crossed
April 16, 1897. (Since ripened 597 good seeds. Orch. Rev. v.
p. 365.)
(5) Angrecum sesquipedale 2 x Lelia purpuratad. Crossed
May 9, 1897. Fine pod 44 inches in girth, opened July 31, 1897,
eighty-three days after pollination ; no seeds, ovules shrivelled.
Interior of the pod full of fluffy, silky, downy threads or fibres,
loosely woven together.
(6) Cattleya Mossize 2 x Angraecum sesquipedaled. Crossed
May 9, 1897. Pod swelled to 2} inches girth; withered away,
July 1, 1897. Pollen tubes had grown 23 inches down the
column, and had reached the ovary ; ovules undeveloped.
Since then I have set two pods of Oncidium incurvum ? x
Odontoglossum crispum ¢, swelling rapidly. Crossed August 11,
1897.
A summary of my notes was republished in M. Cogniaux’s
Dictionnaire Iconographique des Orehidées (Chronique Or-
chidéenne), June 1897, and in the following number M. Georges
Mantin, of Chateau de Belair, Olivet, Orleans, France, was
good enough to give his opinion on these generic crosses, com-
paring them with others made by himself on similar lines, such
as Paphiopedium x Phragmipedium, Cypripedium x Paphiope-
dium, Cypripedium x Phragmipedium, Oncidium Papilio crossed
with self and with other Oncidiums, Lockhartia x self, and
with Oncidiums, &c. M. Mantin obtained pods and even
seeds from these crosses, but had never been able to raise any
plants. (‘‘J’ai observé parfois des grossissements prolongés de
Povaire. J’ai méme obtenu des graines de ces croisements plus
ou moins rationnels, mais il n’est jamais rien levé de ces semis.”’)
M. Mantin also mentioned that he had sown seeds of more than
forty pods of Paphiopedium (Cypripedium) barbatum and allied
species crossed with Cypripedium Calceolus, but none ever grew.
(““J’ai servé plus de 40 (je dis quarante) gousses 4 graines de
C. barbatum et espéces voisines fécondées par C. Calceolus. Je
n’ai jamais constaté qu’une seule graine ait germé.’’) Further,
M. Mantin expresses the opinion that in the above curious
crosses I shall reap the wind instead of seeds, and will be very
482 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
lucky if Ido not reap the whirlwind also in the death of my
plants by submitting them to sucha parentage. I must say that
I am a little more hopeful in this matter than M. Mantin appears
to be, though I stated at the time that “it yet remains to be
seen whether these healthy-looking pods will produce good seed.”
(Orch. Rev. v. p. 180.)
True, in one case I have already “ reaped the wind,’’ but in
another I have reaped good seeds, and one success is worth many
failures, so that I am looking forward to the future with increased
interest. With regard to the health of the plants bearing these
seed-pods, I do not find that they have suffered more than is
usual with seed-bearing plants, and I hope that the “ whirlwind ”
may be yet a great way off.
Still, I do not think it wise to lay too much stress on the
production of pods in these curious generic crosses, for pods are
often formed apart from fertilisation or pollination. Darwin in
his ‘‘ Animals and Plants,” i. p. 484, gives a remarkable instance
of this. ‘‘ Mr. Smith, late Curator at Kew, observed the singular
fact that the development of the ovarium could be effected in
the South African Orchid, Bonatea speciosa, by the mechanical
irritation of the stigma without any pollen.” The Secretary
of the Orchid Committee, Mr. Jas. O’Brien, has had a similar
experience with Lycaste Skinneri and Odontoglossum crispum.
(In. litt., September 25, 1897.) By placing small pieces of
erit on the stigmas of these, he found that the ovaries in many
cases swelled, and the pods attained maturity just as though the
flowers had been properly fertilised ; but of course with no vitality
in the grains within. We have already seen how Dr. Hilde-
brandt and Mr. Harry Veitch independently observed that the
development of the pod in the ordinary pollination of Dendro-
bium and Cattleya takes place long before the pollen tubes have
reached the ovules. We also know from experiments that pollen
grains will push out pollen tubes in an artificial sugar solution,
altogether apart from the stigma ; and, further, that pollen grains
placed in gelatine at some distance from isolated ovules in the
game medium send out their tubes and at once make for the
ovules. This has been observed in the case of widely different
plants. Thus the pollen tubes of a Monocotyledon have been
attracted by ovules of Dicotyledons, and in some cases have
actually penetrated the micropyle itself ; but, of course, fertilisa-
NY
A
Lee
EZ
(iE
ped
MME
Yea
y
x
: SN
S SNS
SIM
RAK
ON
My
My if
Wl
S°x
Fie 1 Ci Ps a £ 2 oje
e 11 B
P) $A 71 I Tr G 1 hronicle
ava ener
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 488
tion has not taken place. (Kerner and Oliver, “ Nat. Hist. Plants,”’
ii. p. 415.) In my own observations in crossing distinct genera
of Orchids, Cattleya x Angrecum, Dendrobium x Epidendrum,
Dendrobium x Cattleya, Dendrobium x Odontoglossum, Epiden-
drum x Odontoglossum, in many cases the pollen tubes grew,
and the pods swelled slightly, but fertilisation ‘did not take
place.
In fully formed pods that have opened prematurely, and
have been found to be empty, nearly all have had bundles of
pollen tubes lying alongside the undeveloped ovules, sometimes
extending to the bottom of the pod, but with no traces of
fertilisation.
Thus we see that the swelling of the pod and the growth of
the pollen tubes may be in a sense mechanical rather than
physiological, and therefore we should not attach too much
importance to the fact that the pod has developed to its normal
size after the application of foreign pollen. We should wait until
proper fertilisation has taken place and good seeds are produced
before venturing to think of success. Even then, if the seeds
germinate by proper treatment, and plants are raised, they may
refuse to flower, as in many Paphiopedium x Phragmipedium
crosses hitherto; and if they flower they may not turn out to be
true hybrids as in the Zygopetalum crosses mentioned above.
“There’s many a slip betwixt the cup and the lip.” Never-
theless, whether we succeed or whether we fail, all these ex-
periments and observations are interesting, and add to our
knowledge of plant life.
FERTILITY AND STERILITY OF HYBRIDs.
Before Darwin published his “ Origin of Species”’ it was
generally held by naturalists that distinct species were seldom
fertile with one another, and that if hybrids were raised at all
they were quite sterile and barren; and very often the whole
question was begged by classing those species that did cross as
varieties of one. Darwin made a most careful and elaborate
study of the whole question of hybridism, and came to the fol-
lowing conclusions :—-* First crosses between forms sufficiently
distinct to be ranked as species, and their hybrids are very
generally, but not universally, sterile.... The sterility is of
484 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
all degrees.” (‘Origin of Species,’’ 6th ed., p. 262.) Again:
‘The sterility of distinct species when first united, and that of
their hybrid offspring, graduates by an almost infinite number
of steps from zero (when the ovule is never impregnated and a
seed capsule is never formed) up to complete fertility. . . . This
high degree of fertility is, however, rare.”’ (“ Animals and Plants,”’
2nd ed., vol. i. p. 163.)
Fifteen years later we find Dr. Alfred Wallace enunciating
similar views. He writes: ‘One of the greatest, or perhaps
we may say the greatest, of all the difficulties in the way
of accepting the theory of natural selection as a complete
explanation of the origin of species has been the remarkable
difference between varieties and species in respect of fertility
when crossed. Generally speaking, it may be said that the
varieties of any one species, however different they may be in
external appearance, are perfectly fertile when crossed, and their
mongrel offspring are equally fertile when bred among them-
selves ; while distinct species, on the other hand, however closely
they may resemble each other externally, are wswally infertile
when crossed, and their hybrid offspring absolutely sterile.”
(“* Darwinism,”’ 1890, p. 152.) Dr. Wallace wrote these words
some seven years ago, but since that time some hundreds of
hybrid Orchids raised by hand from distinct species have flowered
in gardens.
In consulting that admirable work of reference, the ‘“‘ Orchid
Hybrids,” by Mr. George Hansen, of California, with the
second supplement made up to April 1, 1897, I find that there
are on record 733 hybrids from distinct crosses which have
already flowered, and of these 485 are the offspring of species x
species, and the remainder, 248 in number, are all the offspring
of hybrids.
As far as the great Orchid Order is concerned, therefore, we
can hardly say now that ‘“ distinct species ... are usually
infertile when crossed,’’ and still less can we say that ‘“ their
hybrid offspring are absolutely sterile.”
Darwin laid much stress on the different degrees of sterility,
almost as much as on absolute sterility. In Orchids we have
not yet sufficient evidence to show that crosses between distinct
species produce fewer offspring than crosses between varieties of
the same species; or, on the contrary, that they are equally
S ~~ SS==
== OA
=
=
Fie. 112 —Brasso-Catrnnya x DieByano-Trian@ (Carrnuya Tran @ x Brassavoua DicByana do ). (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
NOTES ON SOME CURIOSITIES OF ORCHID BREEDING. 485
fertile, very few of the latter crosses having been attempted ; and
as it is with species so it is with hybrids.
In the meantime perhaps the following figures will give us
an idea as to the relative fertility of species and hybrids in
the Cypripedium group. These figures are taken from the
records kindly placed at my disposal by Mr. Reginald Young, of
Sefton Park, Liverpool, and have been carefully copied by him
from his stud-book with his well-known care and precision.
Taking the Paphiopediums, or East Indian Cypripediums,
which broadly represent the tropical species of this group in the
Old World (see Mr. Rolfe, in Orchid Review, iv. p. 368), I
find that Mr. Young has made 577 crosses among thirty distinct
species, and fifty-three distinct hybrids during the past five
years, crossing species with species, species with hybrids,
hybrids with species, and hybrids with hybrids, and all
under uniform conditions. Out of these 577 crosses Mr. Young
succeeded in getting 452 pods of good seed, which represents
78°3 per cent. fertile. An analysis of these figures shows that
out of 188 crosses between distinct species 179 pods of good
seed were obtained ; a degree of success difficult to excel even in
crosses between varieties of the same species, representing as it
does 95°2 per cent. fertile. While out of 889 crosses in which a
hybrid was concerned in the parentage 2738 pods of good seed
were obtained, being 71°8 per cent. fertile, showing a decrease
of fertility of 23°4 per cent. in crosses between hybrids as com-
pared with crosses between species. This seems to point to the
conclusion that in this Cypripedium group while crosses between
distinct species are almost, if not quite, as fertile as crosses
between varieties of the same species, yet crosses with hybrids,
though fertile to a very large extent, are yet slightly less fertile
than crosses between species. What is the cause of this slight
decline in the fertility of hybrids? From Mr. Young’s experi-
ments it seems to be due in a large measure to the loss of power
in the male element of the hybrid. For out of 148 hybrids
crossed with the pollen of pure species 128 fertile pods were
obtained, or 89°5 per cent., showing a very slight loss of power in
the female element of the hybrids of 5°7 per cent. While out of
118 pure species crossed with the pollen of hybrids only sixty-
seven pods of good seed were obtained, showing 56°7 per cent.
fertile. This represents a lossof power in the male element of the
486 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
hybrids of 88°5 per cent., compared with that of species crossed
with species. Why the male element should be affected more »
than the female element in hybrids is not at all clear; and
whether in time by constant crossing this would gradually be
eliminated I cannot say; but I observe that while species crossed
with pollen of hybrids produce as we have seen 56°7 per cent. fertile
pods, yet 124 hybrids crossed with pollen of hybrids produced
seventy-four good pods, or 59°6 per cent., being an increase of
fertility of 2°9 percent. This may possibly be due to the fact that
the hybrids crossed with hybrids were of necessity more nearly
related to one another than species crossed with hybrids, and it
is highly probable that by constant mixing hybrids may regain
the higher fertility usual among species and varieties.
With regard to the lessened fertility of hybrids used as the
father compared with the greater fertility of hybrids used as the
mother, and its probable effect on the intercrossing of species
in a state of nature, is not for me to deal with now; but it is of
great importance to the evolutionist as a possible factor in the
origin of species. All these experiments and observations prove
to us how important it is for Orchid breeders to keep accurate
and precise records of the crosses they make from time to time,
the details of which may prove to be of inestimable value to
science.
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR.
By Prof. F. W. Oxiver.
[Read November 9, 1897.]
Many plants, especially such as are perpetuated by subterranean
rhizomes, tubers, bulbs, and the like, are characterised by the
particular depth in the soil at which these structures usually
occur. Thus the rhizomes of Aspidistra elatior creep at the
surface, those of Solomon’s Seal at some little depth, whilst
those of Asparagus may be as remote from the surface as 10 to
16 inches. Now in cases in which the structure is normally
buried at a certain depth this is not attained all at once by the
seedling, but gradually, and often only after the lapse of several
years. The seed germinates at or near the surface, and during
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR. 487
the process the representative of the future plant (7c. the
plumule and radicle) may be carried some little distance down,
at any rate a few millimetres into the ground. Not too far,
however, for with the limited resources at its disposal grave diffi-
culties might arise in bringing the first leaves up to the light.
This is often the case when the cotyledon or cotyledons
are hypogeal, and is particularly notable amongst the Mono-
cotyledons, in which the apical part of the cotyledon generally
remains as a sucker within the seed, whilst its basal sheathing
portion emerges, and stretching pushes the radicle and plumule
some little distance into the soil. From this position the first
leaves are unfolded, and various means are employed in different
cases to bring the young plant to a deeper level. It is with
these methods that the present paper is concerned.
1. RootT-SHORTENING.
Not the sole, but by far the most important agent in this
process is the contractility of the root. As this particular
property of roots is a little overlooked in the usual sources of
information, it will be convenient to indicate the main features
of the phenomenon.
A shortening or contraction of the root on the attainment of
a certain age is of frequent occurrence, and in well-marked cases
is associated with a transverse wrinkling, which is quite unmis-
takable. This commences in the oldest part of a root, some
time after growth in length has ceased in the region concerned,
and spreads in the direction of the apex. This is wel] shown in
fig. 118, representing the root of Carwm Carvt, as also in fig, 114,
representing successive stages in the life-history of the Amaryl-
lidaceous Phedranassa chloracea. The general phenomenon of
root-shortening has been the subject of investigations by
de Vries,* Stroever,t and Rimbach,t and the main facts in the
operation may be briefly summarised as follows :—
Many roots exhibit in those parts which have ceased to grow
in length a definite and measurable contraction, owing to a
remarkable change in form in the cortical cells. These still
* De Vries, Landw. Jahrb. 1880.
t V. Stroever, Ueb. d. Verbreitung d. Wurzelwerkiirzung, Inaug. Diss.
Jena, 1892.
{ A. Rimbach, numerous papers in Ber. d. deutsch. bot. Ges. vols. xi.
to xv.; also Fiinfstiick’s Beitr. zur Wissensch. Bot. Band ii. p. 1.
488 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Fic. 113.— One-yEar-oLtp Root or “ Carnum Canvi,”’ sHowinc TRANSVERS
Wrinkiine. (After Stroever.)
2ye
+.
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR. 489
active, living cells undergo a shortening in the longitudinal
direction combined with a marked radial extension. At the
same time—and this is an essential factor—there is an absorption
of water by these cortical cells whose shortening in the one
direction is more than compensated by expansion in the other.
The root, therefore, though becoming shorter, may in the agere-
gate be bulkier than it was before, unless it happens, as some-
times is the case, that a certain number of layers of cells in the
outer cortex become flattened and obliterated. The effect of the
shortening cortex is a very definite one upon the other parts of
the root. The central cylinder of the root, in which are located
the vascular strands, is forcibly compressed, and in cases in
which it is resistent it may assume a sinuous course. The
periphery of the root, 7.e. the piliferous layer, and the imme-
diately subjacent layers of the cortex being by this time dead,
and their walls in part suberised, cannot participate in the
general contraction. It is this portion which, as a consequence
is thrown into transverse ridges and furrows, giving the charac-
teristic appearance of contracted roots.
In addition to these the principal phenomena of root-short-
ening, a transverse striation of microscopic dimensions is met
with in the endodermis and in the layer of cortex immediately
beneath the piliferous layer. This striation is the expression of
minute foldings of the suberised walls peculiar to these layers,
and according to Rimbach arises only in roots which have
entered on the contractile phase.
The amount of actual shortening is very different in different
plants. It may be only 5 to 10 per cent. of the total length involved,
or in other cases may attain to 80 or 40 per cent., or even more.
The special feature associated with root-contraction, with
which we have more particular concern here, is the manner in
which it leads to the drawing of the whole plant down into the
soil. As a root develops it continually penetrates deeper into
the soil and comes into intimate contact by means of its root-
hairs with the particles of the soil, and as the apical develop-
ment continues it becomes in time very firmly fixed. When,
now, contraction supervenes in the older parts, tensions arise
which lead, in the case of roots normally fixed, to a gradual
pulling down of the whole plant into the soil. So considerable
is this tension that if the root be cut,a space 2 or 3 milli-
N
490 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
metres across may arise between the two cut surfaces. Three
stages in the sinking of a young plant of Phedranassa chloracea
into the soil from this cause are illustrated in fig. 114.
The contractility of roots is effective in this way not only
G. 114.—Turee Sraces IN THE EsTABLISHMENT OF YouNG PLANT OF
_ ‘PH#DRANASSA CHLORACEA’ IN THE Sort: (a) Seedling with cotyledon
in seed and one leaf raised above the surface. (b) Six-month-old
plant with four contractile roots, two of which, now arched, are no
longer effective. (c) Year-old plant sunk still deeper. The dotted line
represents the surface. (After Rimbach.)
with vertically placed stem-structures, but also in many cases of
horizontal rhizomes, runners, and the like (e.g. Arwm macula-
tum, Iris germanica,Fragaria ves ca), though of course in many
i
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR. 491
of these the effect is relatively small; whilst in the Bramble
adventitious roots arise from the pendent tips of straggling
branches resting on the ground and draw them under the surface
of the soil. Next season the tip grows up again into the light,
and on the decay of the connecting branch we have an inde-
pendent rooted plant.
Though a certain degree of contractility appears to be a
widely spread property in roots, it must not be regarded as a
universal one. Many plants possessing demonstrably contractile
roots have others in which the property is lacking. In other
cases all roots are contractile, whilst in many instances (e.g.
Colchicum autumnale, Tulipa gesneriana, Zea Mays, and other
erasses, &¢.) none of the roots of the plant show any trace of
contractility. Not infrequently the contractile roots are more or
less fleshy (cf. figs. 113 and 114), and often are of a characteristic
spindle-shaped figure. Such roots, particularly amongst Mono-
cotyledons, owe their fleshiness to a large development of cortex
—of the tissue, that is, in which the contractility especially
resides. And it is amongst these fleshy roots that the phenome-
non is best exhibited, though even amongst these contractility is
not always present, for Rimbach was unable to demonstrate its
presence in terrestrial Orchids (e.g. Orchis maculata, Listera
ovata). In any case such roots play an important part as reservoirs
of reserve materials, and in some cases the plant depends entirely
upon them for storage during the dormant season. That the
functions of storage and contractility should be so often concen-
trated in the same structure is readily intelligible. For the bulky
roots adequate for the first of these functions are, owing to the
powerfully developed cortex, most effective in the carrying out
f the second.
It will now be convenient to illustrate the foregoing more
general remarks by reference to special cases, and for this
purpose the life-histories of a limited number of types may
be epitomised.
(1) All roots-contractile, the primary root not persisting.
> Amongst Monocotyledons the phenomenon has been carefully
followed by Rimbach in numerous bulb- and corm-possessing
plants belonging to the Liliacew and Amaryllidacee.
Phedranassa chloracea (fig. 114).—The seed germinates at
the surface, and forthwith the plumule and radicle are not only
pushed out, clear of the seed, by the elongation of the sheathing
N2
492 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
base of the cotyledon (fig. 114, a), but to a point a few millimetres
beyond and below the seed. In slight degree, therefore, the coty-
ledon co-operates in the sinking of the young plant into the soil,
® common enough phenomenon amongst Monocotyledons. The
radicle now elongates, and the plumule unfolds a first green leaf.
The root soon enters on the contractile phase, and the stem, ever
becoming more bulky, is carried a little further down. Root
after root now arises from the base of the stem, and at six
months the condition shown in fig. 114, 0, prevails. The two
youngest roots are in the contractile phase and exhibit the usual
transverse wrinkles. ‘Two others, including the primary root
(on the left), are arched owing to their points of insertion having
been depressed by younger roots subsequent to the period of their
own contraction. In fig. 114, ¢, the year-old plant is shown. The
bulb is already bulky and deeply sunk in the ground owing to
the continuous production of fresh contractile roots from the
base of the stem.
The depth at which adult plants usually occur is from
15 to 80 centimetres, and Rimbach has shown that when this
depth is attained the roots then formed are less markedly con-
tractile than during the earlier stages. If, however, a fully
grown bulb be placed near to the surface, the fact is recognised
by the plant, and strong, contractile roots are again produced.
The precise nature of this remarkable form of irritability is
obscure and probably complex. It is not proposed to discuss the
question here. Let it suffice to say that numerous experiments
carried out by Rimbach on this plant have established the fact
that at all stages of development a bulb of Phedranassa
chloracea is capable of producing either highly or only slightly
contractile roots, and that the sort formed at any given time is
determined by the depth in the soil at which the bulb rests.
The type of Phedranassa, in which all the roots are con-
tractile, is widely prevalent in the orders Liliacew and
Amaryllidacew. Liliwnm Martagon, Allium wrsinum, Seilla
bifolia, and Leucojum vernum may be quoted as examples.
From amongst Dicotyledons /'ragaria vesca and Hieracium
Pilosella may be named as examples of the above type.
(2) Roots not all contractile. As in type (1) the primary
root does not persist.
Arum maculatum.—Starting as in the last type with the
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR. 493
germination of the seed, we find that the plumule and radicle are
here, as before, pushed out of the seed by the elongation of the
cotyledonary sheath (fig. 115, a). In this way the bud is sunk
some two centimetres in the ground. The axial portion of the
bud undergoes a slight thickening, and the cotyledon and
primary root die away, leaving a little tuber, which remains
Fic. 115.—‘ Anum macuntatum’: (a) Germination.’ (b) Resting stage of
tuber after germination. (c) Young plant in the spring of the second
year. (d) Young plant descending. (¢) Full-grown plant at its
normal depth (spring). (f) Similar plant in August. (9g) Fall-grown
plant, placed near the surface, descending (April). (i) The same plant
during the resting period in August.
- dormant till the autumn (fig. 115, d). At present the apex of
_ this tuber is directed upwards. In the autumn a circle of roots
arises just beneath the apex, and these roots are, some one or
_ two or them, contractile, the rest non-contractile. The result
_ Of the shortening of the former is that the apex of the tuber is
_ drawn to one side, thus occupying a slightly lateral position
— ee ee ee et ee eee
494 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Next spring a green leaf is unfolded from the bud and expands
above the surface (fig. 115, c). In the autumn of the same year
more roots arise, distributed about the apex in the same manner,
those on the under side being contractile. The apex is thus
continually depressed (fig. 115, d), and from year to year the tuber
gradually approaches its normal depth of 10 centimetres. When
this is attained, as shown in fig. 115, e, the new roots are no longer
appreciably contractile, and the tuber extends itself in the
horizontal direction (fig. 115, f). If raised and placed near the
surface the roots formed are contractile, and the sinking process
is again exhibited. (Cf. fig.115,g and h.) As a rule, in Arwm new
effectively contractile roots arise on the tuber in the late autumn.
With winter comes a dormant period; whilst next spring leaves
are unfolded and the roots perform the usual nutritive function.
On the ripening of the fruit (August) the leaves and roots are
lost and another passive phase entered on (fig. 115, f and h).
Finally in the late autumn new roots are developed. .
The above example, in which some, at any rate, of the roots
produced at any given time are non-contractile, leads on to the
more usual condition in which only a very limited number of all
the roots formed have the power of shortening. This condition
is well illustrated by the Crocus. From the base of the old corm
thin nutritive roots arise, and in early spring foliage and flowers
expand from the buds. As time goes on the base of each bud
enlarges and forms next year’s corm. During the development
of these young corms it is a common occurrence for each to give
origin toa solitary spindle-shaped root of considerable succulence
and possessed of undoubted contractility. These roots arise at
the base of the young corms in early spring, and grow past, or
occasionally through, the old corm. They have been occasion-
ally noted in the literature ; thus Maw, in his ‘‘ Monograph of
the Genus Crocus,’’ alludes to these structures as being of only
occasional occurrence upon established plants, though constant
in the seedling. He terms them ‘ ephemeral roots,’ owing to
the fact of their subsequent absorption. Though a storage
function has been attributed to them, there can be no doubt of
their marked contractile properties, as a result of which the
young corms producing them are brought down to the level in
the soil occupied by the old and exhausted ones.
Maw’s reference to this subject (/.c. p. 18) is of interest in
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR. 495
this connection. He says :—‘‘ The seed under natural conditions
germinates near the surface of the ground; but the fully
matured corm is rarely found at a less depth than 3 in., and
often occurs 4 or 5 in. deep. The small one-year-old corm is
always found near the surface, and it is evident that in the
annual process of reproduction it possesses some power of
descending deeper into the ground. This would, however, seem
inconsistent with the mode of reproduction, in which the seed
corm is found on the top of that which it replaces.” He
then describes an experiment in which Crocus seeds were sown
(in August 1878) half an inch below the surface of the soil in a
flower-pot 5 in. deep. On investigating matters in September
1884 the corms were found at the bottom of the pot, and above
each a string of empty corm-tunics representing the downward —
progress of the corms. He concludes :—‘‘ The process of the
descent of the corm from near the surface to the necessary
depth is difficult of explanation, and it must be viewed as one of
the many self-protective phenomena in plant-life, the modus
operandi of which we do not understand.”’
It is my impression that these ‘‘ephemeral’’ or contractile
roots are of much commoner occurrence on Crocus corms than
Maw suspected. This opinion is based on the fact that I have
never for many years had any difficulty in procuring ample
material of these roots for class demonstration, whilst on at least
one occasion the difficulty was to obtain developing corms from
which they were absent. Nevertheless, the conditions of their
variable and perplexing occurrence have yet to bedetermined. I
am inclined to think them especially frequent (in C. awrews and
minimus) in the case (1) of weakly non-flowering corms, and (2)
of corms which have from any cause reached a level too near
the surface. This view is advanced with all reserve, as the
examples that have come under my own observation are too few
to justify any general conclusions as yet.
Other examples of the type in which only a limited number
of the roots formed is contractile include Tigridia pavonia,
Gladiolus communis, and several other Iridacee. From amongst
the Dicotyledons, Oxalis eieyans behaves in conformity with
the above.
(3) A third type, common amongst dicotyledonous plants,
may be described. In this the primary tap-root persists, and it
496 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
and its ramifications undergo a marked shortening. The con-
tractility spreads sometimes to the hypocotyl, which becomes
marked by transverse furrows. This type is illustrated by many
Umbellifere ; e.g. Carwm Carvi (fig. 118), Composite, Atropa
Belladonna, Gentiana lutea, and other herbs with succulent
roots. With this contractility is probably associated the dis-
appearance under the soil at the approach of winter of the
persistent parts of the stem of many perennials, as well as certain
other peculiarities of this class of vegetation.*
In the above cases the level occupied by the plant is materially
influenced by the behaviour of the roots; there remains a large
Fic. 116.—‘ CoxcHicum aUTUMNALE’: (a) Young descending corm from near
the surface. (b) Young stationary corm from the normal depth.
(After Rimbach.)
number of instances in which the roots do not appear to shorten,
but rather definite curvatures of the stem bring the plant to a
given level.
IIl.—Sprcrat CURVATURES OF THE STEM.
This class is well illustrated by Colchicum autumnale, which
has been the subject of detailed investigation by Rimbach. The
normal depth of the corm of this plant is about 15 centimetres ;
but this is only attained by a seedling after the lapse of a long
series of years. The seed germinates at or near the surface in
the usual way, and the young stem soon thickening forms the
primary corm. Each year a new corm arises from that of the
* Cf. Kerner, Natural History of Plants, English edition, vol. i. p. 768.
~
THE DEPTH IN THE SOIL AT WHICH PLANTS OCCUR. 497
previous season. As is well known, the growing apex of the
corm is situated laterally at its base (cf. fig. 116), and it is there
that the new corm is produced. In the case of a Colchicum
plant growing at its normal depth in the soil, the new corm
arises as an outgrowth at the base on the same level as the old
corm (fig. 116, 6). But when the corm has not yet reached the
normal level, as after germination, or if a full-grown corm be
raised and planted at an insufficient depth, the portion of stem
from which the new corm develops does not project horizontally,
but bends downwards (fig. 116, a), so that the new corm is formed
about half a centimetre below the level of the old one. This
process being continued from year to year, the corm is ultimately
formed at a certain average depth, which is maintained. So far
as the roots are concerned, it does not appear that they have any
influence in this sinking of the plant.
Other cases in which the stem initiates the change in level
are Paris quadrifolia, Dentaria bulbifera, Adoxa, Circea, &e.
The exact nature of this response on the part of the stem is an
obscure matter demanding further investigation.
Amongst these curving stem structures we may also include
the ‘‘ droppers” of Tulips. These are particularly well marked,
and of very constant appearance in Twlipa sylvestris. A‘‘dropper”’
is a stolon-like structure arising within the old bulb, which
pushes through the bulb-scales, and contains at its free extremity
a little bulb which sprouts in the usual way ata varying distance
from the parent bulb. Not infrequently this stolon grows down-
wards from the old bulb, and the new bulb is thus produced
some little distance below. So far as my own observations
extend, these droppers appear to behave as would be expected ;
7.e. When the bulbs are planted near the surface the droppers
descend; when very deep and below the normal level of Twlipa
sylvestris in the soil they curve upwards. For convenience I
have termed these droppers “ stolon-like.” In point of fact,
they have a peculiar morphology, and are not simply axial
structures.
IT].—Enoneation or A Foran MEMBER,
The sinking of the plant is aided by the stretching of the
cotyledons in numerous instances. As has been indicated above,
this is usually the case when the cotyledon or cotyledons remain
498 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
within the seed-coat. This occurs, however, only at germina-
tion, and as arule the amount of stretching is inconsiderable.
The co-operation of a leaf in sinking the plant at a later stage of
development has only been observed in Oxalis rubella and in
perhaps one or two other species of this genus. The phenomenon,
as described by Hildebrand,* is of so remarkable a nature that
we include a brief description of it here.
The seed of Oxalis rubella germinates normally enough.
Two cotyledons are raised up on a long hypocotyl, whilst the
tap-root at its junction with the hypocotyl undergoes local
enlargement into a spindle-shaped body. By further growth at
the base of the cotyledons a sheath common to them both is.
formed. From the epicotyledonary bud a single leaf arises, the
base of whose petiole swells up, so that it fits tightly the coty-
ledonary sheath. That portion of the petiole immediately in
contact with the small epicotyledonary bud and below the
swelling now begins to elongate, and, as the petiole is tightly
jammed in the cotyledonary sheath above, the result is that the
proximal end of the petiole, together with the epicotyledonary
bud, are forced into the substance of the hypocotyl. The interior
of the hypocotyl being soft is readily compressed, and the
epicotyledonary bud is pushed down through the whole length of
the hypocotyl till it reaches the spindle-like enlargement of the
root. The petiole then ceases further elongation, and the bud,
conveniently placed within the enlargement of the root, grows
into a bulb-like structure, which subsequently expands. The
means employed in the descent in this plant are remarkable and
unique.
In the foregoing pages I have attempted to bring together
the main facts which have been ascertained—largely by Rimbach,
Stroever, and de Vries—in connection with the various means
employed by plants in reaching their normal level in the soil.
Owing to the difficulties attending continuous observations upon
the subterranean parts of plants our knowledge is still much at
fault, whilst the conditions under which many of the phenomena
are exhibited are unknown. It is because the practical horti-
culturist has such unrivalled opportunities for studying these
little known phenomena in numberless instances that I am glad
that the facts set forth above should appear in the Royal
Horticultural Society’s Journal.
* Hildebrand, Bot. Zeitung, 1888, p. 193.
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 499
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES.
WITH THE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF
JUDGING.
By Mr. Jonn Wricut, V.M.H.
[Read November 23, 1897.]
Very reluctantly from one point of view, but most willingly from
another, I accepted the invitation of our Secretary to treat on
the subject that has been announced for this afternoon’s
discourse, ‘‘ Horticultural Exhibitions and Schedules.”’
The reluctance arose from the pressure of routine duties,
which seem to leave scarcely any moments to spare for ex-
traneous work. As to the willingness, I hope I always have
been and always shall be willing, so long as I am able,
to impart the smallest modicum of information that may be
thought helpful in making smoother the progress of the art we
love. The Queen of all Arts it is to me—the oldest of them
all, yet ever new, the beneficent art of horticulture.
What has it not done, this ancient and modern art in
which we rejoice to labour? What has it not done in various
ways to supply the needs, to satisfy the minds, and brighten
the homes of people of every rank and class in our garden-
loving community? It has done far more than I can say,
and much-—yery much—through the agency of horticultural
exhibitions.
I remember once being impressed with a letter written by the
late eminent American Ambassador to this country, Mr. Bayard ;
and as a few lines in that letter are appropriate to our subject,
I will cite them: “It is all important for national wealth and
development that men and women should not expect to enjoy
bread without the salt of industry. Nothing so stimulates
industry as a realising sense of competition—open, honest, and
above board. An old poetic phrase applied to strife was the
gaudiwm certaminis—the fierce joy of combat—and there is a
touch of itin the more peaceful rivalries of industrial skill
which lead men to admire and respect each other while con-
testing for supremacy.”’
This is exactly true of the best managed horticultural shows
and the best class of exhibitors.
500 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
The diversified and meritorious displays of plants, flowers,
fruits, and vegetables, and of cultural skill, which have been
provided from year to year, have exerted enormous influence in
quickening the zeal, intensifying the love, and bracing the energies
of those who have shared in producing them. They thus, as a
natural corollary, stimulate to greater effort in quest of still
higher achievements. ;
Our horticultural exhibitions do that and a great deal more.
With magnet-like force they attract and hold the minds of
visitors, who become entranced with some object or another
from which they drag themselves with reluctance, only to be
haunted with its charms. In a word, they are “ captured.”
And thus are recruits being constantly enrolled in the noble
army of horticulturists. This extension of interest in gardening
is ever going on and increasing, as it must increase in proportion
to the number of centres from which the wholesome influence
emanates—diffusing itself like some mystic perfume—sweetening
the lives of those who breathe it in deeply—a new breath of life,
indeed, it is to them, and they feel the world a better world than
it was before.
Not only in the metropolis of the empire are the meetings in
this hall and shows of various kinds in and around the city
playing a great part in the conversion of the heathen, who have
not yet learned to love their gardens as they ought, but effective
auxiliaries are formed in earnest co-workers in the provincial
cities and towns of the United Kingdom. And also these centres
of “sweetness and light’’—flower shows—are spreading into
rural villages in various parts of the country. New tastes are
being steadily but surely created, and as the ‘‘ appetite grows
with what it feeds upon,’ the future of horticulture is safe. It
contains within its huge horn of plenty enough for all: the rich
and the rare for the affluent, the not less wholesome or less
beautiful if cheaper fare for the workers; and, depend upon it, it
will not be till both men of wealth and men of labour share in
due proportion in the good things of Mother Earth that our
land can be made the land of Goshen that every true lover of
his country wishes it to be.
Let us, then, wish prosperity to horticultural shows of all
kinds and sizes and in all places, for if well conducted and
successful all are doing good. All, however, it has to be
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 501
admitted, are not successful. Some start with a flash, have a
brief comet-like career, and collapse; others struggle on in a
hand-to-mouth manner because they are not founded on a sound
basis, and are not managed on the most prudent lines. Then
some which are fairly successful, and continue from year to year,
seem to do so more as the result of chance than of forethought
and a well-considered plan of operations properly carried out.
The proceedings at and in connection with one show may
be all that can be desired in smooth working, the harmony of
co-operation among the officials, with the resulting orderliness
and punctuality in execution being pleasant to see. In another
show confusion may rule supreme: “regulations ” be ignored as
if they had no existence, “‘ time’ regarded as an unconsidered
trifle, lateness and litter the prevailing features, while errors
abound to try the patience and tax the resources of the judges in
their efforts at rectification.
What are the chief desiderata of horticultural exhibitions,
and what are the main obstacles in preventing their attainment ?
Surely two primary objects that their promoters ought to keep
steadily in view are stability and independence. It is greatly to
be feared that too many shows are regarded by a not inconsider-
able number of persons, who have voice and vote in their
formation and conduct, as institutions for the distribution of
prize money. When that is so the element of stability is of
necessity lacking, for more than a justifiable amount, having
regard to incidental contingencies, is almost certain to be
allocated to the prizes. With a majority of exhibitors on com-
mittees there is great danger of the cost being underestimated
and the estimated income exaggerated.
The chance of success is then entirely dependent in summer
on “‘ flower show weather,’ and largely so, but in a much less
degree, in the autumn. It is only by having a majority of clear-
headed business men, wholly indifferent to prizes, on the exhibi-
tion committee that there is reasonable hope of a society placing
itself in a position of independence; and when it finds itself in
the happy state of meeting all demands, regardless of the
weather, it can practically command all other requisites for
insuring success.
A Sounp Founpation.
This brings us to a question that is too often overlooked in
502 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the management of horticultural societies—namely, the establish-
ment of a reserve fund. And lest it should be thought from the
foregoing observations that it is assumed that all gardeners are
averse to this (as they assuredly are not), it is pleasurable to be
able to here embody the opinions of one who has won many
prizes, and whose connection with a successful show, of which
he was for some years the able Secretary, entitles him to be
listened to with respect. Mr. G. W. Cummins writes :—
I think, when you are preparing your paper for the R.H.S. on “‘ Exhibi-
tions and Schedules,’”’ it would be a good thing were you to call attention to
the necessity for every horticultural society to build up a reserve fund. We
all know that many societies have to depend to a great extent on the amount
of the money taken at the gate, and a “ wet ’’ show day often means ruin to
a society which has no fund to fall back upon. I think a reserve fund
should at least be equal to the amount of money offered in prizes every year.
It must be disheartening to a successful competitor to be told after a show
that his or her prize money cannot be paid in full because the funds of the
society will not allow it. This has been done, to my knowledge, more than
once, and has resulted in some of the best supporters losing confidence and
leaving the society. Mr. Sherwood, who is treasurer of the Streatham and
Brixton Horticultural Society, in speaking at the annual dinner of that
society recently, said how much he desired to see a reserve fund established
there, and generously offered to give a handsome donation towards it.
Mr. Sherwood is a gentleman of great business capacity,
in full sympathy with all efforts that are made for the expan-
sion of horticulture. His convictions on the subject ought to
have much weight, and it is hoped that the society in question
will make strenuous efforts to at least double the amount of his
donation, whatever it may be, at the earliest possible moment,
even if it involve a temporary reduction in prize money. The
society will be placed on a more permanent basis, the horti-
culture of the district continuously advanced, and even exhibitors
will be gainers in the end. Obviously what applies to this
society applies to others. Still, as no teaching is so cogent
as that of experience, an example may be given of a southern
provincial show which has been placed on a firm basis, namely,
that of the Carshalton district society in Surrey. Mr. A. H.
Smee is the Chairman of the committee of this society, and from
his long experience as a director of one of the leading insurance
companies, no one knows better than he the wisdom of making
provision for the future.
The reserve fund which he started with a donation a few years
ago has, under prudent management, steadily increased, and now
the prize money for a forthcoming show is assured, no matter
|
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 5038
however disastrous the weather may prove. Sooner or later the
time will come when a portion of the fund may have to be applied
to its legitimate purpose. This will demonstrate the value of
such a fund, while the work of the society will go steadily on.
Financial difficulties are the precursors of conflicting opinions
and divided counsels, and these in turn of collapse.
Some years ago great exhibitions were provided in a northern
city. With three consecutive shows came torrents of rain,
and after the first year or two the funds were exhausted.
There was no reserve. Strenuous exertions were made to
continue the exhibitions, such as by part payment of prize
money. Future obligations were incurred, the fulfilment of
which wholly depended on the weather on a particular day
specially chosen for a hoped-for retrievement—a fatal day it
proved, for show and society were washed away. Last year
endeavour was made to recommence horticultural exhibitions in
the same populous centre, but, profiting by the experience of the
past, active preparations were held in abeyance until a fund was
established equal to the discharge of all obligations, without
taking into account the payment of visitors to the show—a wise
course undoubtedly.
If the active movers in the establishment of horticultural
shows were to take more time in preparation for a first event, in
order that a substantial sum might be realised, much future
anxiety and trouble would be averted. A year lost at the begin-
ning might be a gain of many years in the end, and instead of a
struggle with difficulties ending in bankruptcy, a permanent
institution would in all probability be the happy alternative.
Especially would this be so if the steady accumulation of a
reserve fund had a claim on the managers equal to that of
providing money for prizes.
We appear, however, to be living in speculative days in which
risks are run on the chance that the wheel of fortune may turn
in the hoped-for direction ; and just because this is so, in con-
nection with many horticultural shows, it is the more incumbent
to point out a safer and surer if slower way for achieving per-
manent success.
The really great shows of the kingdom, such as Shrewsbury,
York, and others which could be named, are what they are
mainly because of the strength of their financial resourees—the
504 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
result of sound policy inaugurated and carried out by able com-
mercial men. This has won for them the stability, independence,
and prosperity of which they may be justly proud.
A majority of successful business men of accredited posi-
tion, and with pronounced horticultural sympathies, is an
element of strength on a flower show committee which cannot
be oveér-estimated.
I have treated somewhat fully of this subject of making
provision for a rainy day, because it is of fundamental im-
portance, and does not commonly receive the attention it
deserves in treatises and discussions on horticultural shows.
Passing now to the shows themselves, and matters in con-
nection with them, various points suggest themselves as worthy
of consideration ; but prior to their discussion it will be appro-
priate to refer to the schedules of prizes.
RULES AND REGULATIONS.
A prize schedule, with its rules, regulations, conditions, and
definitions, should be regarded as the law governing the par-
ticular show to which it applies. It is that or nothing, and
being the law the terms employed in the setting forth of the
several requirements cannot be too carefully chosen. They
must be concise, precise, and so clear as to be very easy to
comprehend and very difficult to misunderstand. There must
be no breach in any of the enactments either by exhibitors or
judges; and certainly there ought not to be by any of the show
authorities, though on one particular point they are far too often
the chief delinquents in breaking their own regulations.
If classes are loosely drawn and an exhibitor is prejudiced
in consequence, the fault rests, not with the exhibitor or with
the judges, but the lawgivers. It is unfortunately true that
the terms employed for public guidance are occasionally the
reverse of clear. In such cases when products are staged
judges may not unreasonably, by a process of induction from
the rules and from other classes, endeavour to satisfy them-
selves as to the intentions of the committee, and do the best
they can.
I have often known it necessary to appeal to the authorities
of the show on doubtful points, and more than once, with the
unsatisfactory result: ‘‘Oh, we are not quite sure we leave it
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 505
to the judges.’ In this dilemma, which ought not to occur,
and in the absence of evidence:of an exhibitor staging otherwise
than in the belief that he was within the terms and intentions
of the schedule, he should, in accordance with the custom of
English judicature, be given the benefit of the doubt and his
exhibit admitted. ‘To convict him of doing wrong and rule his
products out of competition when he had no precise guidance
would be practically fining him for the shortcomings of others
for which he could not be in the least responsible.
THe DRAFTING OF SCHEDULES.
Though it is gratifying to observe that much greater care
appears to be exercised in the drafting of schedules than was
common a few years ago, not all of them are so clear as they
should be. Prior to a general summer show in which a
gentleman was closely interested he received a schedule which
he evidently regarded as somewhat of a puzzle. In substance
he described it as excellent, but in form very loose, for the
following reasons :—
Under the general heading ‘‘ Open to All’’ he found a class
“Open to Blankshire,”’ and soliloquised thus: ‘ One’s first
thought is—Of course it is open to Blankshire if it is open to
all. But a second thought arises. Why, it means that only
Blankshire men may compete, and in that case the class in this
‘open to all’ section is really ‘closed to all’ except exhibitors in
one county.”
This confusion was caused by the omission of the one word
“only.’’ It was inserted in some other classes as ‘‘open to
nurserymen only’’ and “open to Blankshire only,” and the
terms were thus clear ; but there were several subsequent classes
governed by the large general heading ‘‘ Open to All” that were
said to be simply “open to Blankshire,”’ leading the gentleman
to conclude that the words last cited ‘“‘were redundant and
unnecessary, because if ‘open to all’ obviously the classes are
open to Blankshire as part of all, and open to other counties as
well.”’ .
As a matter of fact it is believed that the several classes, with
the assumed “ redundant and unnecessary ’’ words attached, were
intended not to be open to any but Blankshire exhibitors. This
might be understood to be so locally; but the point of the
O
‘
506 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
matter is this: An ardent horticulturist was deceived by the
terms as they stood, and his strictly correct and logical reading
of the schedule led him to a wrong conclusion.
This example of ambiguity suffices as well as many to show
how much may hinge on such an apparent trifle as the omission
of a small word from the stipulations. As a matter of fact
nothing is a trifle that serves a distinctly useful purpose. If it
were really necessary to incorporate the local classes with those
in the “ open to all”’ division, the addition of a line underneath
—“ except where otherwise indicated ’’—would have met the
requirements of the case, and then an appendage of ‘‘ Blankshire
only ’’ to certain classes would have made the desire of the com-
mittee apparent to all.
Occasionally classes are set forth in terms which cannot be
complied with when the exhibits come to be examined. For
instance, prizes were recently offered for a specimen Chrysan-
themum, any variety, single stem, that carried the largest number
and best quality blooms. Asa result several plants were placed
in competition. Of the three chosen for the prizes one had
some 200 so-called blooms, another sometlung over 100, and a
third about two dozen. There was not one good bloom on the
two larger plants; but a dozen fine specimens on the smallest
plant. In the difficulty the judges concluded that the word
“and’’ was accidentally inserted, and that ‘‘ of’ was intended ;
and as there was the largest number of best quality blooms
on the smallest plant, it was accorded the premier position. In
the framing of classes it is well, therefore, to keep in mind, not
only what is desirable, but what is practicable. °
THE AMATEUR PUZZLE.
Among doubts and difficulties that frequently occur in connec-
tion with shows are those which arise from what may be known
as the perennial “ amateur’’ question. In the schedules and at
the exhibitions of the Royal Horticultural Society the established
rule is to regard all competitors as “amateurs”? who are not
nurserymen. ‘This broad distinction meets the requirements of
the chief society fairly well, but it is very far from meeting those
of the overwhelming majority of local societies.
This isrecognised in the excellent code of Rules for Judging.’’*
* « Rules for Judging and Suggestions to Schedule Makers, Judges, and
Exhibitors.” .H.S, Office, 117 Victoria Street, 1s, 1d. post free,
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 507
After the statement that “no person shall be allowed to compete
as an amateur who cultivates plants (or other garden produce)
for sale,’’ it is recommended that doubts as to the qualification of
an exhibitor be referred to the committee of the show for decision.
Very good advice it is, but unfortunately many committees find
it difficult to decide the point, and disputes appear to go on as
briskly as ever among the several persons interested.
What puzzles thousands of ardent lovers of small gardens in
which they work so diligently, and who regard themselves as true
amateurs (as they are), is that, as they say, such “ professionals ”’
as Lord So and So’s gardener can show in the same classes as
themselves at the exhibitions of the Royal Horticultural Society.
They never think, for instance, of his Lordship as the real ex-
hibitor, employing a Mr. Capability Brown to grow garden pro-
duce for home use and pleasure, but not for sale, and hence the
eligibility of the products. But then it may be asked, and is
asked, “‘Is Lord Somebody Else an amateur, and eligible to
compete as such through his gardener, who grows produce for
sale in a depot in London?’ According to the precise rules
of the Royal Horticultural Society he is not. His Lordship
could compete in an “‘open”’ class, and his gardeners in a class
for ‘‘ professional gardeners”; but if he staged in the amateur
classes, and a protest were lodged, it would be bound to be
sustained, and the exhibitor disqualified.
A fact to be kept in mind in considering this amateur ques-
tion is that the rich can, and hundreds of them do, love gardening
as intensely as the relatively poor, and the comparatively poor
can, and happily thousands of them do, love it as ardently as
the relatively rich. We must for practical purposes divide them
into two intelligible sections—both rendering good service in a
common cause, namely—(1) Amateurs as patrons of garden-
ing. (2) Amateurs as the actual workers of their own gardens.
The former may employ as many gardeners as they wish
provided they do not grow for sale. They are then well within
the meaning of the term “amateur,” from the Latin amator, a
lover of any particular art, but not profiting by it. The definition
of the second and larger section, for the purpose of exhibiting,
varies somewhat in different localities, but generally the qualify-
ing conditions are well set forth in the rules of the “ National
Amateur Gardeners’ Association ”’ as follows :—‘‘ No person shall
02
508 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
be eligible for membership who disposes of plants, flowers, seeds,
or trades in garden produce for profit, or is in the employ of a
nurseryman or gardener, or is employed as a gardener.”
Occasional help from a labourer in digging, wheeling, or similar
rough work is allowed.* All other actual cultural work this
type of amateur must do with his own hands. By some societies
a person is not allowed to exhibit in the amateur classes if he
has the aid of any paid assistance, directly or indirectly,
in working his garden. Whatever the show regulations may
be, they must be strictly complied with.
An admirable example of amateurs of the first class is found
in the President of the Royal Horticultural Society, Sir Trevor
Lawrence, Bart., who has sought unweariedly for a number of
years, by precept and by example, to create interest in and to
advance the prosperity of British gardening. A worthy specimen
of the second class is afforded by Mr. Alfred Lewis, of Beckenham,
who is employed daily in London from 9 a.m to 7 P.m.; yet he
trenches with his own hands all the available parts of his
garden in the autumn by lamplight, and won fifty-three prizes
in 1897, also the silver medal. as the most successful amateur
exhibitor at the great co-operative festival show held at the
Crystal Palace in August of the same year.
TERMS AND DIFFICULTIES.
There are four terms commonly employed in the classifica-
tion of schedules—namely, ‘‘kinds,” “ sorts,’ “ species,” and
“ varieties.’ It is not too much to say that many (though not all)
compilers of schedules and framers of classes have no clear con-
ception of the meaning and significance of these terms. That
being so, it is not to be wondered at that far larger numbers of
exhibitors have hazy ideas as to their interpretation. Moreover,
this haziness has many times extended to judges. Thoroughly
good gardeners they may be, but they have not closely studied
the meaning of all the terms with which they come in contact.
It is highly important for framers of schedules, exhibitors,
and judges to clearly understand the relative significance of the
governing terms employed in defining the classes.
* When the terms “ occasional help” and “ similar rough work’ cannot
be satisfactorily defined, either the ‘no paid assistance’’ principle must
govern or special conditions framed to meet local peculiarities and require-
ments,
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 509
For the purpose of exhibiting flowers the word “kind” ig
practically identical with the word “ genus” (which consists of
an assemblage of species and varieties of kindred plants); but as
a class entitled “twelve distinct genera of Hardy Flowers”
would appear a little stilted, if not puzzling to many cultivators
the more familiar word “kinds” is substituted in schedules.
‘*Twelve bunches of flowers, distinct kinds,’’ whether these be
hardy or tender flowers, means there must be one, and one only,
representative of the kind or genus. This representative may be
either a ‘“‘species” or “variety,” but there must not be both;
and if a bunch of, say, Antirrhinums, or Carnations, or any
other flowers be staged, this bunch must consist entirely
of one variety. A mixed bunch would be open to disqualifica-
tion. . And there must be twelve bunches, no more and no
less; there must be no excess of representatives, because the
number stipulated (whatever it may be) is definite and in-
flexible.
We have now to distinguish between a ‘‘species”’ and
“variety.” That great numbers of persons fail in doing this ig
evident by the number of ‘ varieties ’’ of flowers which are sent to
the editors of horticultural journals to be named. They send
what they call six “species”’ of Azaleas, or of Fuchsias, or of
Carnations, or of Roses, or of Chrysanthemums, or of any other
kind of flower, and these prove to be not “ species ”’ at all, but
“ varieties,’’ and therefore outside journalistic stipulations as to
naming species only.
To put the matter concisely, ‘‘ species’? may be regarded as
the ‘‘fixed”’ stars of earth, or flowers of nature, which vper-
manently represent the genus to which they belong. They
remain the same from generation to generation and century to
century. Under natural conditions they are not prone to change.
The Wild Roses of the far past are the same in our hedgerows
to-day, as are the Daisies in our pastures, as well as many old
familiar flowers in our gardens.
But when “‘ species”’ are removed from their natural habitats
and given high culture in gardens, they are apt to change after
the manner of the wild Viola tricolor taken from the cornfields
by Lord Gambier, and planted in his garden a little over seventy
years ago. Seedlings from the changes thus effected showed
still further divergence—the result of pollen influence—and
510 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
thus was our present race of Pansies established. The variations
thus obtained were not ‘‘species,” but varieties.
All flowers raised from seed which differ from those which
produced the seed are varieties, no matter how long the said
varieties may have been perpetuated by cuttings or other methods
of increase. It is the same with plants raised from “ sports.”’
As all exhibitors of flowers ought to comprehend the essential
difference between the species and varieties, and as it is certain
that many do not so comprehend, no apology is made for these
observations. Instructing the inexperienced, I suspect, always
has been and always will be the most useful teaching of all.
The word ‘“ species”’ is not nearly so often used as the domi-
nating factor in schedules as was the case afew yearsago. This
may be the result of disqualifications plus the discovery that
much better displays of flowers are obtained since its abandon-
ment. An incident at a provincial show is illustrative of both
propositions. Prizes were offered for stands of “‘ twelve bunches
of hardy herbaceous flowers, distinct species.’’ Thirteen stands
were staged in competition. Only one exhibitor was within the
conditions, and his stand was the least imposing. The others
contained “ varieties ’’ of Delphiniums,Antirrhinums, Carnations,
as well as of Roses and shrubby Spireas; or, in other words, the
flowers were not all “species”? nor all of herbaceous plants.
The first prize was given to the least attractive but most correct
exhibit, the cards being withdrawn from the others, and extra
prizes granted to three of the stands “on their merits,” as an
equitable method of meeting the case. This was long before
the recommendations of the Royal Horticultural Society in its
Rules for judging.
As to the word “ sort,’’ though still found in some schedules, it
ought not to be used in any. It means anything. It evidently
applies to “ varieties ’’ in most of them, while in dictionaries it
is defined as meaning “kinds or species.’’ An exhibitor may
“ sort ’’ out or choose the best of any of them for his object, but
when sorted they are either ‘‘ kinds ”’ or “‘ varieties’ for purposes
of exhibition, and except under very special circumstances these
two terms suffice. As the word ‘“‘ herbaceous’’ has been mentioned,
it may be said that the most concise definition of it is this.
“Herbaceous plants are plants which produce stems annually
from a perennial root,” (‘‘ Johnson’s Gardeners’ Dictionary.’’)
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 511
It must be understood that it is only for the purpose of
exhibiting flowers that the terms “ kind”’ and “ genus” are said
to be practically identical, and if this is not an exact representa-
tion it has the merit of being safe, and the farther an exhibitor
may diverge from it, the greater the risk he incurs of running
himself out of the competition. Some judges have a very strict,
others a more elastic way of discharging their duties, and it is
best not to give them a chance to disqualify an exhibit. There
are exceptions to the identity of the above terms in some fruit
and vegetable classes (see R.H.8. “ Rules’’), but these are usually
made clear in schedules, which should be strictly followed.
DuTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Other matters to be noticed include the positions and obliga-
tions of officials and others connected with them, such as (1) the
rights and responsibilities of committees ; (2) the duties of secre-
taries; (8) of managers and stewards; (4) of exhibitors; and
(5) of judges.
CommitTEES.—The committee (or council) of a society is the
supreme controlling power of its show. It is also the official
court of appeal for the settlement of doubts and difficulties,
unless the decision on some point is delegated to others, and
published in the regulations. As its members are responsible
severally and individually for the payment of prize and other
moneys, they have as a body the corresponding right of determin-
ing the nature and amounts of the prizes in each class, with the
principle on which they shall be allocated, as will be hereafter
noted. They are also responsible for the production of the
schedule, and for all the terms employed therein—a matter of
considerable importance.
SECRETARIES.—The secretary of a show may be regarded ag
the executant of the requirements of the committee, both as to
the collection of subscriptions, keeping accounts, registering the
decisions of the-judges, the disbursements of prizes, and the
arrangement and general supervision of the show. Some secre-
taries are something like autocrats, and seem as if invested with
all the powers of a committee. When they, as not a few do,
combine zeal not only with ability but affability, and insist on
rigid compliance with the rules and regulations of a society, the
shows entrusted to these active, courteous, and clear-headed
512 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
officials are generally the best managed. Swaviter im modo,
fortiter in re might well be the motto of the best show secre-
taries, for they are certainly ‘‘ gentle in manner, but vigorous
in deed’’; or, in other words, an iron hand is encased in a
velvet glove, as it ought to be. Horticulture owes much to the
devotion, untiring labour, sound judgment, and urbanity of the
secretaries of societies which are established for the advancement
of the art and industry which all who love gardening desire to
see in a flourishing state.
STEWARDS OR Manacers.—By whatever name these ex-
tremely useful secretarial assistants may be known, they con-
tribute materially, not only to the effect of an exhibition, but to
the avoidance of mistakes in staging, also in facilitating, the
work of judging, for which adequate time is allowed as a rule
only at the best conducted exhibitions. Stewards of shows direct
the staging of produce, and know where all the classes and
exhibits are placed. They ought also, but do not always,
immediately after the judging is completed, rearrange as may
be needed easily movable exhibits, so that the space at disposal
is somewhat equally occupied. Nothing so mars the appearance
of an exhibition (except uncovered tables and the exposure of
rough packages under them) as alternations of crowded products,
be they flowers, fruit, or vegetables, and vacant staging. If the
exhibits are disposed more thinly, most of the surface may
usually be occupied. Allowing a few inches of space, when this
can be done, between class and class is not only permissible but
desirable, as it enables visitors to- perceive without difficulty
where one class ends and another begins. When stages are
crowded, and the admirers of the exhibits numerous, it is
practically impossible for the separate classes to be distinguished.
Another matter might with great advantage be attended to
by the stewards of shows, but is frequently, if not generally,
overlooked—namely, satisfying themselves that the show is in
proper order for judging—(a) by the space (as for groups) allotted
not being exceeded, and (b) by correcting accidental misplace-
ments.
As to the question of ‘ space.” As this is stipulated in
schedules by the show authorities it is unquestionably the duty
of these authorities to see that it is not exceeded. It is no part
of the duty of a judge to measure the space that is occupied by
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 513
certain products in which he has to adjudicate. This involves a
waste of time, which is not infrequently all too short for the
discharge of his legitimate duty. Judges have aright to assume
that all exhibits announced on a ‘‘space’’ basis are (if not
otherwise specified by show authorities) eligible for competition.
As to “misplaced cards.” When a competitor stages in
several classes he is apt in the hurry of the moment, and
obviously quite innocently, to place a card containing his number
on the back to an exhibit where such card ought not to be;
either the exhibit is in the wrong class, or the card is. The last
named occurs the more frequently, and if one mistake of this
kind happen there must of necessity be another. When such
accidents are numerous serious delay arises in the rectification
when judging. True, the regulations may say ‘‘ exhibitors are
responsible for the correct placing of the prize cards.” They
cannot possibly be too careful in doing this, and old showmen
rarely make a mistake. As the steward knows the number of
exhibits in each class in the section of a show over which he has
control, he ought to pass along before the judges and see that
the cards are right. At some shows much time is wasted by the
judges waiting till the errors are rectified. It is true they could
pass them, but this might possibly deprive some competitors of
two prizes; but the “ penalty’ would scarcely “fit the crime ”’
in the case of a pure accident, and the desire of a judge worthy
of the name is to do substantial justice. He will do it too, if he
can, even if he be too late for luncheon.
Exurpitors.—*‘ Without exhibitors there can be no show”’
is a truism that has been uttered a thousand times in proposing
a certain post-prandial toast. While admitting the accuracy of
the observation, there is something else to be said. Though
exhibitors can make the hearts of show authorities glad, they can
also make them inexpressibly sad, and this in two very different
ways: (1) In making entries, and then ‘failing to fill half or
indeed any of the space reserved ; (2) in either making no entries
at all or making them too late, and then bringing loads of pro-
duce to a show and clamouring for space when every inch has
been allotted. In this latter case, when the intended exhibits
cannot be accepted, the show authorities are often blamed if not
abused—a manifest injustice. On the other hand, the non-
fulfilment of obligations causes great anxiety and worry to
514 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
managers of exhibitions, who are often placed in positions of
great difficulty in filling the blanks thus created.
All thoughtful persons will admit the reasonableness of the
following points (or they would if they were responsible for the
management of a show) :—
(1) State on the entry form as exactly as possible the amount
of space required where space is not stipulated, as it isin many
classes.
(2) Post all entries before the date mentioned for receiving
them and not after, as is unfortunately too common—at least so
say many secretaries.
(83) They also say, as they are fully entitled, that every
exhibitor when he finds he cannot fulfil his entry should at once
‘“‘wire’’ to that effect. This would contribute to the peace of
mind of the officials, and prevent blanks that it is often
impossible to fill at the last moment. It is feared, and in fact
stated, that some exhibitors are smart enough to wire when it
is to the advantage of themselves, but slow to move in preventing
inconvenience to others.
(4) When new or rare plants are exhibited it is instruc-
tive when practicable to give their native habitats. It is
conceivable, however, that this might occasionally be thought
too “instructive”? to some enterprising explorer. When new
fruits are submitted for the first time, particulars of the site and
soil in which they were grown, also the character of the trees, is
information that the examiners like to have before them. When
new varieties of plants, fruits, or vegetables result from cross-
fertilisation the parentage is usually given—even if it is some-
times guessed at.
(5) Entries made by private gardeners should contain the
name (or title) and full address of the owner of the produce,
signed by the entrant in each case. Cards are very imperfectly
filled at some shows, through the omission or illegibility of
either the name of the owner or gardener, or the address of
either. Some secretaries, who desire to fill in the cards properly,
can only do so by consulting horticultural directories, and not
always then; while others do not try to obtain the requisite
information, but seem to like those methods the best which are
the easiest to carry out.
(6) Every owner of the exhibited produce, as well as the
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 515
gardener who grows it, is entitled—one as providing the means,
the other the skill—to be credited with the exhibits on the show
cards ; and as most of the inscriptions can be written in advance
they ought to be so bold and clear as to be read by the majority
of visitors without removing the cards, which causes obstruction
and possible misplacement. ‘The duty of filling in the cards
obviously devolves on the officials, but exhibitors must first
supply the information in ample time, as many by inadvertence
do not. (See p. 522.)
(7) Last, but not least, exhibitors should always commence
the arrangements of their products soon enough to be able to
complete them before the time stated in the schedule for judging
to commence. This is done by all the most successful exhibitors
at all the best managed shows.
JUDGES AND JupGiInG.—At the moment of commencing this
section an unexpected communication arrived from Mr. Owen
Thomas, V.M.H. ; and as much that he says is so pertinent, it is
at once cited, with additions which it is not necessary to indicate,
as we both think alike on the subject :—
“‘ Horticultural exhibitions have so increased both in numbers
and importance, and the money value of the prizes distributed
throughout the country amounts in the aggregate to such an
enormous sum, that the office of judge, at whose discretion the
whole of this large amount has to be apportioned, has also grown
in importance in the same ratio.
“Not only is the office an important one as regarded in that
light, but it is equally important, if not more so, regarded from
the higher ground of honour and pride. Certainly the office of a
judge and the result of his adjudications are exposed to a much
fiercer light than formerly by reason of the ever-increasing
keenness in competition and the greater competency of exhibitors
to detect flaws and errors of judgment when such by chance
occur. |
** Tt is difficult to define the qualifications of a good all-round
horticultural judge, but there are certain cardinal attributes
which all will admit a judge must possess before he can secure
and retain the confidence and respect of committees and exhi-
bitors. A good judge must have an intuitive knowledge of the
value and rarity of the exhibits placed before him acquired by
long experience, practice, and a wide field of observation, He
516 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
must be familiar with the best of everything in the domain of
gardening, and capable of appreciating the skill that is displayed
in its production—knowledge which cannot by any possibility
be gained by anyone from books, codes, or rules alone, however
closely he may study them.
“Tt goes without saying that a judge must be favourably
known among his confréres for his uprightness of character,
unswerving probity, and absolute invulnerability to any extra-
neous influences whatsoever. He must possess a cool and level
head, with good perceptive powers; be able to concentrate
attention on the work in hand, exclude all outside topics from
conversation, and have the requisite nerve to make up his mind
when the right moment comes, never giving a thought as to
whom he may either please or offend. A judge must feel that
for the time being he is invested with a power, in his small
sphere of action, as great as that of the most despotic Eastern
potentate, and must also at the same time be impressed with the
consciousness that his responsibility is as great as his power.
He will then discharge his duties honestly and honourably, even
if he should, through the inherent frailties of humanity, happen
to err.”
PRINCIPLES OF JUDGING.
Before referring briefly to the routine of judging, it seems
desirable to consider the principle on which the prize money
is to be distributed. This is a question that the committee must
determine. There are two widely differing systems in operation
—one ancient, the other modern; one adopted generally, the
other resorted to occasionally.
The older plan is the easier, but many persons do not con-
sider it the fairer. It is based on the allocation of a certain
sum of money to each class. This is divided into differing
amounts, which are specified long before a show as first, second,
third, and occasionally more prizes. This is called the “ ancient ”’
system, because it has been in operation in contests of various
kinds from time immemorial. It is the only system considered
in the R.H.S. Code (page 8). An excellent method of dividing
the aggregate amount is there indicated; and, seeing that it is
based on a definite principle, it is surprising the plan is not more
generally adopted.
The alternative modern principle may be shortly described as
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDUMES. 517
the “ point value” system, the prize money allotted being divided
pro rata according to the number of points, or marks of merit,
adjudged to the three or four exhibitors (according to the number
of prizes determined to be given) in a class.
I have received many letters directing attention to various
matters connected with exhibiting, and one writer deals somewhat
forcibly with what he calls the present “arbitrary system” of
fixing the different amounts. He says :—‘ We usually see these
prizes varying in the first, second, third, and so on, in the pro-
portion of from 20 to 30 percent. For example, £28 is allocated
in a class in four sums of £10, £8, £6, and £4. ‘This pre-
supposes that the third prize collection should be 33 per cent.
better than the fourth, the second prize collection 100 per cent.,
and the first prize collection 150 per cent. above it; whereas in
close competitions there is frequently not more than half a dozen
points of value difference between the first and fourth collections.
On this basis if the £28 were divided according to the ‘ point
value’ of each of the four collections the amounts due to the
exhibitors would be very muchas follows :—First prize, £7. 10s. ;
second, £7. 5s.; third, £6. 15s.; and fourth, £6.10s. This
shows a difference of only £1 between the first and the fourth
instead of £6 under the ordinary system. In some competitions
the relative merits of the exhibits are still closer, and when we
see a superb collection beaten by half a point only, as sometimes
happens, and the cash prize is some pounds less than that given
to the first, it must be apparent to every thinking person that
the system which establishes such an anomalous partition is
manifestly unjust and indefensible. The ‘ point value’ system
of apportioning the prizes is no experiment. It has been adopted
for several years in a competition of nine dishes of vegetables at
Carshalton, always exciting the highest interest, and in every
instance giving the fullest satisfaction.’’
Such is the letter. The last sentence in it I know to be true,
as I have been a judge in the class since it was established.
The essence of the “ point value’ system of judging is based
on the principle that every point or mark of merit accorded is of
equal value (as it is), and can be represented in money. The
precise amount is easily determined,
518 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
DETERMINING Pornt VALUES.
Assuming that four prizes are to be awarded in a class, the
‘‘ points’’ secured by those four of the exhibitors who have the
greatest number are added together; and the sum set apart for
the class is reduced to shillings, pence, or farthings, as may be
needed. The division of the result by the total number of
points gives the value of each point. The multiplication of this
“point value’? by the number of points of each of the four
exhibitors gives the exact sum that is due to them in each case.
The amount of necessity varies according to the total sum
allocated, and the number of points accorded to the produce in
competition. For instance, in Kent a very complete scheme is
in operation of encouraging superior culture in cottage gardens
and allotments. The County Council grants a sum for prizes.
Originally the amounts were fixed in the ordinary way ;
but the inspector, Mr. W. P. Wright, F.R.H.S., finding that
this was not equitable, some men getting too much, and others
too little; according to the quality of their work, proposed that
every point gained by a worker should entitle him to a penny,
provided he gained a given number of points as representing
creditable work.
This “ penny a point’’ system has proved so satisfactory, as
tested in upwards of 200 instances, that the few centres which
preferred to have the prize money divided in the nsual way of
fixing the sums beforehand, now desire to have them based on
the exact merits of their work. They perceive that several of
the first-prize men receive under the old system much higher
amounts than they are justly entitled to, while a far larger
number, who follow them closely, as second, third, and fourth
in merit, are penalised accordingly. The new plan is now
called the ‘fair plan’’ by hundreds of men, who are worthily
striving in friendly rivalry to excel each other in the com-
mendable work in which they are engaged, namely, making
their gardens and allotments in the highest degree productive
and attractive.
Having given an example of the working of the “ point
value ’’ system in which the prizes were very numerous, but
small (as in the above Kentish instances)—though not in the
aggregate smaller than is customary in such cases—it seems
desirable now to test the plan where the prizes are high, and
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES, 519
the classes and competitions of a national character. An
opportunity is afforded for doing this by tabulating the prizes
that weve awarded in the orthodox way, and those that would
have resulted if the “* point value ’’ system had been in operation
in the two great classes at Shrewsbury last year. Here they
are :—
Decorative Dessert Taste Crass (Shrewsbury, 1897).
eit tA hteen x warded Points recorded, ascer- Aggregate “ Point Value,”
tained value Is. 11d. each excluding decimals
os. a me 3. ae
Ist 1212 0 1053 10 2 23
2nd 1212 0 1043 10 0 33
ard «S88 (OO 992 910 83
4th 5 5 0 962 9 4112
£38 17 0 | 406 | £3818 2
The reason of the money value of the Society’s first and
second prizes being equal was the addition of £5 with the
Veitch medal to the first prize.
Taking no account of this, but regarding the addition as an
award of honour won by one point, advocates of the “ point
value ’’ system would say that the
1st prize winner had above his just due £2. 2s. 93d.
2nd ‘ - above a £2. 11s. 83d.
3rd Fe es below % £1, 2s. 83d.
4th ys a below $ £5. 9s. 113d.
If the total amount allocated in the schedule could not be
exceeded by 1s. 2d., it would only be necessary to deduct 33d.
from each of the prize winners to insure an exact division of the
£38. 17s.
Victorian Fruit Cxass (Shrewsbury, 1897).
F Point orded, ascer- Aggregate “ Point Value,”
Prizes awarded reer eesik 72d. each excluding decimals
£ | mets. ae
Ist 30 821 26 8 33
Qnd 25° 297 94 8 Q%
3rd =s 20 294 24 3 105
£75 | 912 ee ae aa
Deduct 4d. from each prize winner, and the odd shilling is
disposed of.
The greater the number of points recorded the smaller is the
520 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
value of each, but this in no way affects the actual relative
amount in prize money to which each exhibitor is entitled
under the ‘point value”’ system of apportionment. ‘The figures
adduced will satisfy its advocates that the first prize winner had
£3. 1s. 8}d. too much, the second prize winner 11s. 24d. too
much, and the third prize winner £4. 3s. 10}d. too little,
according to the marks of merit awarded by the judges.
It should be said it is not the duty of judges to determine
the relative amounts—they simply hand in their points as usual,
and their conversion into money is quick and easy office work,
by a simple sum in addition, division, and multiplication, as
indicated in the first paragraph on page 518.
This system is now fully placed before the public for the
first time, and the public must judge of its merits.
It may be said in reference to this plan that, for the purpose
of stimulating competition, the prizes should either be limited
to a specified number, as in the ordinary way; or that no com-
petitor shall be eligible as a recipient who does not win a
stipulated number of marks, representing commendable work,
as for gardensin Kent. The first-named method is the better
adapted for shows, and where it has long been in operation the
greatest efforts are made by exhibitors first to get within the
charmed circle of prize winners, and then to obtain the greatest
possible number of points, knowing that every one of these adds
its quota to the prize money that will be received. Distributing
the total amount offered in a class among the whole of the
exhibitors in it would amount to frittering, as some might, and
not improbably would, obtain a share whose produce would not
be entitled to any recognition on its merits.
Another point to be noticed is this—that while a limited
number of classes containing products capable of this definite
appraisement might prove of special interest if the prizes were
allocated pro rata according to the points or marks recorded,
to adopt the system in many (much more in all) classes would
necessitate a corresponding increase in the number of judges.
“Pointing” takes time, and too much of the time appor-
tioned to the judges, as published in the schedules of shows,
is filched from them by late and slow-moving exhibitors, in some
cases with little or no interference by the authorities of those
shows,
i
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 521
RovuTINE IN JUDGING.
When a show is properly arranged, 7.c. when the steward
has seen that there are no misplacements of exhibits, or of
cards bearing the correct class and exhibitor’s number, or any
omissions of cards, the adjudication proceeds smoothly and
as expeditiously as the nature of the competition permits.
Experienced judges work quietly and systematically somewhat
on the following lines :—
1. Observe the number of prizes offered in a class and the
attendant conditions in the schedule.
2. Count the number of exhibits in the class—if only one,
_ give it the prize to which it is entitled—be it first, second, or
third. Act similarly in the case of two exhibits only, with-
holding any prize or prizes of which they are not worthy. A
judge must (or should) not only act justly to an exhibitor, but
also to the society and to himself. (An exhibitor should also
remember that there is more honour in showing well in a
strongly contested class and losing than in winning a prize with
weak produce ina class in which there is little or no competition.)
3. If the exhibits are numerous, by a quick yet searching
glance, at once rule out the obviously inferior, not looking at
these again as they are judged ; then concentrate attention on
the few remaining in competition for the prizes.
This initial routine applies to the judging of all the classes
in a show, and all kinds of produce in them.
For marking those exhibits which are ruled out of com-
petition, the class cards may be used. For instance, in long
lines of Chrysanthemums, or any other flowers, or in the case
of many collections of fruit or vegetables, the cards of those
which are “out of it’’ can be pushed back practically out of
sight, while those of the exhibits that require further examina-
tion can be usefully drawn forward. This prevents a good deal
of needless marching to and fro, or doing work over again that
is otherwise often indulged in.
In dealing with heavy competitions in single-dish classes of
fruit, such as Apples, Pears, or any other kinds ; or of vegetables,
such as Potatos, Peas, and Beans, with perhaps twenty or thirty
dishes in a class, I know of no better plan than simply placing
_ the cards on all that have no chance of obtaining prizes. The
few uncovered have then only to be looked at again, and the
work which at first looks formidable is speedily done.
522, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
It must be understood that it is a point of honour with self-
respecting judges not to turn over a prize card to see the name
of an exhibitor. ‘‘Names”’ are nothing to them, the condition
of the products everything. After assisting in the examination
of many thousands of exhibits, I have never seen a judge of
repute turn up a card through motives of curiosity ; yet a few
societies think it necessary to enclose exhibitors’ cards in enve-
lopes, with the requisite numbers for judging purposes printed
on them, and these are all the adjudicators want to see.
Usually these numbers are printed across the top side of the
cards or of the envelopes which contain them. This is the worst
position, for this reason :—When the cards are pushed, as they
are under boxes of flowers, or plates of fruit or vegetables, to the
extent of two-thirds for security, the numbers are hidden, but
if the numbers are near the lower edge of the card they are visible;
this therefore is the best position for them.
(On Envelope.)
SPECIAL NOTICE.
This Envelope (with Card enclosed) is to be placed on the Exhibit.
After the Judging is over, the Card will be placed in position.
No. Class. Exhibit.
4 7 48 Blooms.
(Front of Card.)
WINCHESTER HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
THe FiIrrrEENTtTH GRAND
EXHIBITION OF CHRYSANTHEMUMS,
Fruit, FLowers, &c.,
At Tue Guinpnatt, on Thursday and Friday, Nov. 11th and 12th, 1897.
(Space for gummed Prize Slip.)
No. 4. Class 7 (48 Cut Blooms).
Exhibitor—F. W. C. Read, Esq., Kilmeston Manor, Alresford.
Gardener—Mx. C. H. Holloway.
(Back of Card near the lower edge.)
Exhibitor’s No. Class. Exhibit.
4 7 48 Blooms
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 523
When the numbers are printed along the bottom of the card,
and thus not hidden under exhibition boxes or stands, the judges
jot down the awards as they are made—first, second, or third, as
the case may be.
Reverting to the actual awards, these can be made with
accuracy in nine classes out of ten, and often in nineteen out of
twenty, by carefal comparison, observing closely the merits and
defects in the competing exhibits, balancing one with the other
in each collection, until a mental estimate of the value of the
whole is obtained in each case. When the judges have not
a shadow of doubt that their decisions are correct, one of
them marks them on the back of the cards first, second, and
third, and so on; and the other does the same in the spaces
provided in the judging book, or on a card provided for the
purpose. It is an excellent plan also for one of the judges there
and then to either attach the gummed prize slips to the cards,
or to see that this is properly done by an attendant; the possi-
bility of errors occurring is then reduced to a minimum.
If the prize slips are not attached at the time of judging,
the secretary or his clerk follows with the entry book for placing
the card figures, first, second, third, and so on opposite the
names of the successful exhibitors. An excellent judge and
ex-show secretary, Mr. E. Molyneux, gives an important
reminder, and perhaps a rather hard hit when he says truly:
“Some judges, Iam sorry to say, make such indistinct figures on
the backs of the cards that none but themselves can read them! ”’
Let those whom the “cap fits”’ put it on.
If either of the judges has a lurking doubt as to the correct-
ness of the impressions arrived at by ‘‘ comparison,’’ there
should be no delay in appraising the value of collections of
fruits or vegetables, or stands of flowers, by giving to each item
in them the marks or “points”? to which it is entitled. If
admittedly competent judges agree on the value of each item
then the total number of “ points’’ obtained by each com-
petitor will in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred be correct,
whatever any persons, who may be taken by surprise, say to the
contrary. It is important to decide quickly on the question of
“‘pointing,’’ as it is very easy to lose more time in pacing to
and fro among the exhibits, and sometimes getting confused,
than would suffice to do the work in the best possible manner.
Tn commencing the work of determining the exact value, so
P2
§24 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
far as can be done, of the individual items in a collection, men
who have not had much experience in the process, especially
if they are of sanguine temperament, are extremely prone to
commence pointing too‘ high.” “ Here is a glorious bloom! ”
they say, or ‘Here is a grand dish!’ and down goes the
maximum. By-and-by they come to distinctly better specimens.
What then? Well, they look rather foolish, and the conceit is
taken out of them. Old judges make no such mistakes. Why ?
Because the conceit has been taken out of them before.
Only the very best specimen in any class, if such can be found
distinctly superior to all others, should be accorded maximum
points. If there happen to be a few of equally commanding
merit they would, of course, be equally honoured, but such
occurrences are rare. The frequency with which equal prizes
are given at some shows represents easy, not to say slipshod,
judging, for which experts were scarcely needed.
There are two methods of “ pointing,” or rather of entering
the points or marks of merit, as shown below, one slow, the
other quick, but both equally accurate. The last and the best
was, so far as I know, initiated by Mr. James Douglas. The
asterisks indicate blooms, the figures beneath them their value.
Sample of Revised Edition of H. V. Machin’s Judging Card for Roses, &c.
No. |Class Examples aoe
2414 ns x |x| x |e} xe] x fete] «| x | « | * | *] x |Back row blooms &
7 \63) 6 |6| 53.623) 7| 6 | 7/63) 6 | 53) 63) 7 |6| 8 | points of merit ./103
%\x%| % |x] x [xe] ] we [eta] x | xe | oe | x |] * |Middle row blooms
6 53] 5 |43! 5 |5|6] 4 |5/45 5 | 5 | 53) 53/6) 6 | &points of merit | 863
%{%] % |] % |e] ae] we [ete] we | we | xe | xe |e] * [Front row blooms
5|5| 4342) 4 33) 4 fale 5| 45) 4 | 33) 4 |5}| 53) & points of merit | 712
eaten te Mets Md A At es |i lee | 1 ee
18 17/153 ibe 15 ni cat L5g/14}}153 165 17/198 Total in 3 rows .
By the first, or “‘ slow,’ method the blooms are pointed from
left to right, the value of each set down, involving, of course, 48
entries, or in three collections, 144 entries.
By the second, or ‘‘ quick,” method they are pointed from back
to front in triplets. Take the first three on the left, thus: Back
row bloom, 7; middle, 6; front, 5; added mentally=18; and
soon. This results in a saving of 82 entries on each stand, and
in the three collections saves 96 entries,
<-- gee a
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 595
As will be apparent when there are several classes in a show
in which pointing is necessary, the saving of time by the
triplet method is very material, and may in fact make all the
difference between having the work completed before the
entrance of the public or otherwise. The last-named method
is even quicker than it appears on paper, for experienced judges
find it as easy in most cases to regard the three blooms as one,
and set down their aggregate value, as to appraise them sepa-
rately. When there is the suspicion of a doubt in the mind of
one of them they are valued individually. Though it is well
known that exhibitors examine, and very properly, the work of
judges closely, it is not so well known that judges watch
each other not less acutely. This is as it ought to be, and does
not apply to judging flowers alone, but everything on which they
have to adjudicate.
Though in the above example the merit gradations are set
down in full or in half points, it is under the popular eight-
point standard system, originated by myself, just as easy to
divide still further, 7.e. as easy to divide the halves into quarters
and set down, say, 7} or 7%, if the judges cannot quite satisfy
themselves that a 74 entry represents the exact value of what-
ever may be under examination. This is, as a rule, the quickest
way of settling doubts, and the verdicts of competent men could
not be very far wrong. Asa matter of fact it is rare for them to
differ in the work of appraisement; and though I have in my pos-
session at the least 20,000 entries, I do not remember a case in
which it was necessary to call ina referee when pointing had been
carefully done, and the judges were unanimous in their decisions.
It may, however, perhaps be recorded here that in one
instance of judging ninety-six blooms of Chrysanthemums for an
important prize, two other sets of experts were, with the full
consent of the official judges, appointed to test the verdict. One
set arrived at one point above, the other one point below, the
total number which had been previously handed in, and Mr.
George Gordon was a happy man that day.
In judging certain exhibits by comparison, which in their
nature are not amenable to having their several items valued
individually, and especially when the wording of the class is not
so clear as it might be, occasions may and do arise when two
judges find a difficulty in arriving at a decision. In such cases
596 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
nstead of indulging in long argument, by which both may
easily be confused, it is better to call in a referee—a judge who
is acting in other classes at the show—and let his vote settle the
matter without a word of comment on his verdict by either of
the judges.
In large shows requiring several adjudicators, working in
pairs is found the best arrangement. ‘Two judges will complete
a given number of classes in less time than three, and if the two
agree that suffices. At some shows, or important sections of
shows, one judge is occasionally relied on. If he be a man of
proved capability, not as a cultivator only but as a judge, and
the products are amenable to “ pointing,’ the plan answers; but
there are very few men indeed on whom such responsibility
should be imposed, and it would not be difficult to cite cases in
which ‘one man verdicts’’ have led to so mueh dissatisfaction
that the work has had to be done over again. It is better in all
cases of doubt to avoid such contingencies. At the same time
where the “‘ one judge ’’ plan has been found by experience to be
in all respects satisfactory, there would seem to be no valid
reason for changing such plan, while security would rest in the
retention of the particular man.
Tur ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES.
Large shows are necessarily divided into a number of
Sections, such as—
1. Puanrs.—Specimens, groups, and Orchids.
2. FLowEers.—Embracing (a) Floral decorations ; (b) Bunches
of hardy and tender kinds respectively; and (c) Florists’
flowers,
8. Frurrs.—As in (a) Collections; (b) Grapes, possibly in
great force; (c) Choice stone fruits; (d) Imposing displays of
Apples and Pears.
4, VEGHTABLES.—In great diversity in collections and speci-
fied classes.
Whether the judges number eight or more, they should not
only be absolutely indifferent as to whom the prizes are awarded,
but they must be able, from intimate knowledge and wide
experience, to determine the different exhibits that are the most
entitled to the respective honours. The Plant judges should
include at least one expert in Orchids, That is important, and it
Se See
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 527
is equally so that one of the Flower judges have an intimate
knowledge of florists’ flowers. It is essential that judges of
fruits be well acquainted with the varieties, characteristics, and
potentialities of the different kinds ; while judges of vegetables
must have given special attention to this substantial section, and
have in their minds clear ideals of the features which in the
ageregate constitute the highest standard of excellence in the
various kinds.
We may find a body of men selected in which all these
requisite qualifications are embodied, but the best is not always
made of them. Experienced show officials, who know the
particular capacities of their judges, usually assign to them those
classes with which they are best qualified to deal; but many
instances have occurred of placing them in incongruous
positions. For example, a judge specially skilled in plants
(including Orchids) and a recognised adept in judging groups,
does not find himself in the happiest position when ‘‘told off”’
to the vegetables, though he accepts it pleasantly enough as a
novelty; while a first-rate fruit or vegetable authority does
not feel himself the most at home among florists’ flowers of
which he may know little, or in dealing with Orchids, of which
he may know less.
A sensible method of assigning the judges was the simple
one adopted at a provincial show. ‘ Gentlemen,”’ observed the
Secretary, ‘‘ You know each other, and what you can respectively
do, better than I know; please join partners in the best way for
judging the show.” This was done in two minutes, and the
work was completed in a manner that proved satisfactory to all.
Let the services of the best procurable judges be obtained,
place them in the right positions, and errors in judgment will
be reduced to as near as possible the vanishing point. A
thorough “ plantsman ”’ will not allow some gigantic specimen
that may be easily grown in two years to overwhelm another
which is in its nature smaller, but has required the exercise of
the highest cultural skill over a dozen years to bring it into
such superb condition; nor will an orchidist err by allowing
a huge plant, about as easy to grow as a Cabbage, to triumph
over one naturally smaller, but far more meritorious as an
example of cultural skill.
Any product which, in the condition in which it appears,
528 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
affords unmistakable evidence of the greatest cultural difficulties
having been overcome, and the soundest judgment exercised in
its superior presentation, may be regarded as the best represen -
tative of the gardener’s skill; and this, with refined taste in
arrangement (if an element in the case), ought ever to be kept
in mind by adjudicators.
Tor ARTISTIC GROUPING OF PLANTS.
The mention of taste in arranging plants suggests that a
little may not inappropriately be said on this subject ; and it
cannot well be said better than in some observations of my
friend, previously quoted, as foliows :—‘‘ There are no more im-
portant classes at our great shows at the present day than the
classes for groups of plants arranged for effect, and competi-
tions of cut flowers to fill a certain space effectively come
under the same category. There are no classes in which it is
easier for a judge to err than in these, possessing as they do so
many divergent points of quality and interest. I think that a
note of warning is needed to remind judges of the danger to
which they are sometimes exposed by the passing charm of what
I may call the upholstery and millinery of the body of groups
of plants and arrangement of cut flowers for effect in the way of
mirrors, ribbons, trimmings, and other artificial adjuncts. This
style is all very well to a certain extent, but carried too far
it savours too much, to my mind, of the draper’s shop and too
little of the garden.”’
By the upholstery is presumably meant those arches and
bridges of rustic cork, like gigantic umbrella ribs, which, when
unduly obtrusive, have certainly a chillingly artificial appear-
ance; so have those toy-like pieces of mirror introduced to
represent water. This method has gone far enough, and if it
goes much farther no exhibitor need be surprised if he is defeated
one of these days by a simpler, more natural, easy, and graceful
association of beautiful plants. At the same time very many
groups are still too formal, prim, packed, and smooth, to meet
with the approval of persons of taste ; and, notwithstanding
a number of gratifying instances to the contrary, far too
many Chrysanthemum groups are undoubtedly spoiled by a
bristling forest of obtrusive stakes and a brave display of pots.
As the merits and defects of groups are concisely set forth on
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 529
page 31, “ R.H.S. Judging Code,” the subject need not be further
pursued here ; but space may, perhaps, be afforded for something
that has not hitherto been published.
ORIGIN AND History oF EXHIBITION GROUPS.
As this has not been written, and as few persons are in-
timately acquainted with the facts, it may be desirable to record
them, with accuracy, in the Journal of the Royal Horticultural
Society. The late Hon. Alexander Leslie-Melville was the
originator of these groups ; and it may here be incidentally men-
tioned that his brother, the Hon. William Leslie-Melville, was the
first to send seeds of the Deodar (Cedrus Deodara) from the
Himalayan Mountains, in 1831, to his ancestral home in Fife-
shire, where two or three of the first British-raised trees are
still flourishing. ‘The introduction of the Deodar,’’ observes
Mr. Veitch, in his admirable ‘‘ Manual of Conifere,’’ “‘ marks an
epoch in the annals of British arboriculture.”’ But let that
pass. ’
Mr. A. Leslie-Melville was a great lover of gardening, and
President of the Lincoln Horticultural Society. Observing that
all the prizes for ‘‘ specimen plants’’ went in rotation to those
gardeners who alone in the district had structures of sufficient
capacity for growing them, and believing that equally good culture
was displayed in smaller plants of a decorative character grown
by amateurs and gardeners in smaller structures, he proposed in
the “‘sixties,” through the Cottage Gardener, that prizes should
be offered for such plants pleasingly arranged.
His society not responding, he resolved to test the prac-
ticability of the matter in a small way, and offered, to working
amateurs, a garden frame for the best collection of small
plants arranged in the space the frame would occupy, or about
86 square feet. The result was such as to justify the Society in
offering in the following year, what was a great sum in those days,
prizes of £3, £2, and £1 for larger groups of plants effectively
arranged, open to all England. There were ten competitors,
and the writer of these lines had the honour of winning the
first prize. That was, I think, in 1869. Subsequently a show
was held in a suburb of the city, inaugurated by the Vicar of
Bracebridge, the Rev. C. C. Ellison, who still takes an active
interest in gardening. The munificent sum of £5 was provided
530 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICOLTURAL SOCIETY.
as a first prize, and this was won by the same exhibitor
as before in a great competition, the judges being, it may be
interesting to state, the late Dr. Hogg, Mr. J. R. Pear-
son of Chilwell, and Mr. T. Speed of Chatsworth—as fine a
trio as ever judged at any show, but, alas! all gone. The year
of this gathering is fixed by the entry in a book “ purchased on
the field of Waterloo, September 18, 1872,” for which visit, and
to the Belgian nurseries, the £5 came in helpful in defraying
the expenses—an investment in search of health and knowledge
which was abundantly justified by the results.
Such, then, is, so far as I know, the beginning of the grouping
system, which has become the prominent feature in the plant
classes at hundreds of shows; and it may perhaps be said that
those two first prizes ever offered were won by a departure from
the close packing, smooth banking, formal method of arrange-
ment which was adopted by all my competitors in those early
days, and which is “so long a dying.’’ The grouping system
eradually spread. Prizes for attractive arrangements of plants
were offered and well won in 1875 at Richmond. It was in
the same year, also, that this method of exhibiting was raised
from a local to a national custom. It was a memorable year in
the annals of the Royal Horticultural Society, for in it the South
Kensington dynasty was overthrown for ever, and the Society
has increased in prosperity accordingly.
In celebration of that great change practically the whole of
the London nurserymen joined forces, and, without fee or
reward, produced an exhibition of a unique character on
August 21st. They brought out their finest and rarest plants in
varied sizes, and arranged them in the most picturesque manner.
It was an exhibition of groups—the greatest and most diversified
ever seen. Commenting on this show in the Journal of
Horticulture I said :—‘‘ The occupation of space in the most
effective manner has been well demonstrated. Is it not reason-
able that the instruction afforded should be utilised? Would
it not be wise to apportion a given amount of space at shows
generally and leave exhibitors to occupy it as they choose, with
large plants or small, few or many? If it would be wise to do
so, would it not be also wise to do it well—that is, to offer large
prizes, or at least place the space classes on a level with the
specimen plant classes at our shows ?”
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES, 581
In no long time groups became general, because of the
generous encouragement given to them at many shows. They
brought into the competitive arena numbers of persons who
would otherwise have been kept out, drew public attention to the
decorative value of innumerable small but beautiful plants
adapted to their conveniences, and afforded charming examples
of delightful and effective plant association. Competitive
groups have done nothing but good—even the bad ones, these
acting as examples for avoidance.
Let it be understood that in these observations nothing is
implied as to the superiority of groups over skilfully grown and
nobly represented specimen plants. Nothing gives such weight and
dignity to a show as the magnificent ‘“ Cypherians,’’ but there do
not appear to be many cyphers left equal to producing them
after the manner of those indigenous to Cheltenham.
DIFFICULTIES IN FRu1tT CLASSES.
Difficulties are incidents of life, and judges of garden produce
encounter a fair share. They are the most common in fruit
classes, and especially, perhaps, with Grapes. For example,
Mr. Owen Thomas writes:—‘‘ An exhibitor will show fine
examples of Black Hamburgh Grapes, well set up, large in bunch
and berry, but lacking somewhat in colour and finish ; another
exhibitor shows bunches which are not so large, but of good
shape, and the berries also a trifle smaller, but which carry a
perfect bloom, and are in other respects faultless. ‘The majority
of good judges (but not all) would attach less weight to superiority
in size than to superb quality and high finish ; andin my opinion
they would be right. This indicates a principle which might
with advantage be kept in mind in judging high-class fruit.”
I quite agree with Mr. Thomas, and we are both in accord
with the R.H.S. Code (page 13). Many times in such conflicting
cases I have put this question to a judge: “‘ Supposing you were
expected to furnish the best possible dessert to-night for a party
of distinguished guests, and either of these two exhibits of Grapes
was at your disposal, which should you choose?” In nearly all
cases, if not in every case, he has been drawn from the very
large bunches with somewhat faulty berries to the smaller yet
excellent bunches of practically faultless Grapes.
582 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
In my opinion superiority in quality, cultural finish, and
attractive presentation, in all kinds of garden products what-
soever, should be more highly estimated than superiority in
size alone, accompanied by apparent defects.
One of my own rules for judging is this. Specimens with
the fewer faults should win the higher prizes. It has been put
to a severe test on many occasions in determining the premier
bloom in a Chrysanthemum Show—one bloom out of many
hundreds. Discover a specimen with which no fault can be found
in size, form, fulness, substance, freshness, and clearness of
colouration, free from spot or blemish; find another equal, or
rather larger, in size, but in which small faults are visible in
some other respects. Which is entitled to win—the faulty or the
faultless? The last named wins, as it ought. Apply the
principle to other products, and you will not go very far wrong
in your decisions.
Mr. Thomas directs attention to another judge-puzzling
class, namely, “such varieties of Grapes as Alicante, Gros
Colman, Gros Maroc, Gros Guillaume, and grapes of this
inferior class, pitted against varieties such as Black Hamburgh,
Madresfield Court, Mrs. Pince, Muscat Hamburgh, and others of
that character. As well,’ he says, ‘‘ pit a race-horse against a
van-horse, or an Alderney against a shorthorn at a cattle show.”
He thinks each of these two sections of Grapes should have a
class to itself, when they can be judged on their merits. Mr.
John Easter is of much the same opinion. As he wishes to bring
the Frontignans and other small rich-flavoured Grapes into more
extensive cultivation, he would stipulate for “ well-grown and
well-finished bunches, to be judged by flavour.’’ *
Many prizes have been offered for the best flavoured Grapes,
and a large proportion of them have gone to some of the most
dingy, miserable-looking specimens imaginable, which dis-
played no skill in cultivation. They were akin to numerous
scrubby little Melons which happen to possess flavour, but are
no credit to the cultivators all the same. The R.H.S. very
properly insists on some evidence of culture by stipulating that
* Mr. David Thomson suggests that ‘collections’ of Grapes should
consist of varieties to be specified in schedules, or in other words that each
competitor must stage the same varieties in his collection, instead of
diverse varieties being pitted against each other in the orthodox way.
|
a a es
-~
:
;
, .
+
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 533
Melons to be eligible for prizes should not be less than 15 inches
in circumference.
What may be termed the “Flavour Grape” competition
proposals are good, but unless good culture is also an essential,
and in evidence, the exhibits would be so weak and poor in
appearance that the varieties would be more likely to repel than
to attract, and to decrease rather than increase in cultivation.
Until such ‘‘ flavour ’’ classes are provided as suggested, we
have to accept facts as we find them; and if we find, as we do,
the heavy ‘‘ cart-horse’’ Grapes and the more refined “ racer ”’
types exhibited together, they have to be dealt with. This isa
difficulty which cannot be evaded, and must be surmounted. In
searching for the best and most equitable way of doing this, we
must not overlook the existence of an indisputable concrete fact,
namely, that neither late Grapes, late Apples, nor late Pears can
be judged by flavour at a summer or early autumn show; but
they can be for “cultural excellence.’’ A determining factor,
then, is, Which displays the higher cultural merit for the
respective varieties, or which has the fewer faults, apart from
flavour, which is not yet in some varieties developed, and this
from no possible fault of the cultivator ?
Here comes in the importance of having judges who
thoroughly understand Grapes and the characteristics of varie-
ties, including their ease or difficulty of cultivation. Such a
judge would not be prone to err by rating a cluster of Alicante,
weighing 4 or 5 lbs., many if any points higher than a full and
well finished bunch of Madresfield Court or Muscat Hamburgh,
a pound or so lighter. On the other hand, he would not allow
flavour alone, as represented in a poorly grown bunch of any
variety of Grape, to ride triumphant over another infinitely
more meritorious as an example of superior cultivation. An
episode in practice will make the point clear.
Three bunches of Grapes were in competition at a November
show—Muscat of Alexandria, Mrs. Pearson, and Foster’s Seed-
ling. ‘‘ Oh,” observed one of the judges, “the Muscat must be
first, of course!” ‘ What!” rejoined the other, ‘‘ why, it is
only a fifth-rate sample of what a Muscat should be, while Mrs.
Pearson is a first-rate sample. Did you ever see a better example
of it; full of fine clear berries, and probably 3 lbs. in weight ;
and did you ever see a much worse Muscat?’’ ‘Oh, well,” was
584 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
the hesitating response, “if you look at it in that way. But
‘flavour,’ you know!’’ He was invited to taste Mrs. Pearson,
and say if it is third-rate. He tasted, and with a look of surprise
said: ‘‘ Why, it’s good; I think it will have to be first, after all.”’
First it was by far, Foster’s Seedling second, and the draggling
strip of Muscat, without the suspicion of a shoulder, third.
Given equal excellence in cultivation in two bunches, then the
casting vote might well go to the variety possessing as such the
best flavour, even if this were not quite developed at the time.
When there isa conflict of nearly evenly balanced merits let a
judge who knows what a bunch of any particular variety should
be to entitle it to be regarded as “first class’? ask himself this
question : ‘“‘If I were the grower of these two sets of Grapes of
which of them should I be the more proud, and if I could only
exhibit one set for a prize which should I choose?’’ He will
then extricate himself from the difficulty in deciding, and need
not concern himself about what the loser may say. If he is
wise he will say little, but just make up his mind to win in the
next contest.
WINNING AND LosING.
If bearing their honours meekly, as most successful exhibitors
at our shows do, is a virtue, enduring losses and disappoint-
ments bravely is a greater virtue still. This is happily the rule,
and consequently any violent departure from it stands out the
more boldly, and it is seldom that an exhibitor now humiliates
himself by vulgar abuse of a judge who has honestly done his
duty. Itis reported of the estimable Dean of Rochester who,
after judging a Nottingham Rose Show, came in contact with a
violent loser—‘ My friend,’’ the Dean is reported to have said,
in his own inimitable way, as he laid his hand gently on the
man’s shoulder, ‘‘ my friend, I always said if ever I went mad it
would be over the Rose.”” The rebuke so happily conveyed went
home and the storm ceased.
Some few years ago one of the best of gardeners and of men
was taken by surprise by being placed second instead of first with a
collection of vegetablesat Winchester. Rushing in his impetuous
way to find the judges he encountered one of them. ‘‘Am I
to understand,” he demanded in excited tones, ‘“ that you judged
the vegetables?’’ ‘‘Yes.’’ ‘‘ What, you!”’ he exclaimed still
louder. ‘“ Yes; what is the matter with them?” “ Matter,
HORTICULTURAL EXHIBITIONS AND SCHEDULES. 535
why it’s scandalous! You had better go home and never judge
again.” He calmed down eventually, as was his wont, and was
then invited to the collections. ‘‘ You could not have pointed
them,’ he remarked. No reply. ‘‘ Very well,’’ he went on,
“‘T will show you.” ‘Yes, you name the points and I will put
them down,’ which was done. “Now then add them.’
*“No; better do the others first, and add allup together.” This
was done, and his collection lost by one point on his own judg-
ing. “ Now, my friend, I will show you my points.” ‘What!
then you did point them?” “Yes; very carefully, and here
they are.” They were exactly the same ashisown. He gripped
the judge’s hand. “Come again,’ said he, “if you will, I
promise never to find fault with a judge again.’”’ That splendid
gardener and warm-hearted man was the late William Wild-
smith.
A parallel case occurred at a Chrysanthemum Show. The
loser of a silver cup for blooms was vowing vengeance on a
* London judge’’ if he could find him. The judge was taking
note of the blooms later in the day when accosted as a visitor.
“Do you understand blooms, sir?’’ “A little, and I have found
some good ones here.” ‘I should think you have, and I am
done out of the cup by a London ignoramus. They say he has
gone, and a good thing for him.’”’ The judge invited the injured
exhibitor to “go through” them with him, intimating that if
the judges had blundered they should be “shown up.” He
nominated the points and agreed to every one put down for the
forty-eight blooms in both stands, and his own lost by seven
points. He was then shown that in the opinion of the judges he
had only lost by six! On being asked what he had further to
say he replied, ‘“‘ What can I say but that I have made a fool of
myself, and am very sorry ; lama young man and have learned a
lesson.’’ It is very easy for judges to be condemned after a two
minutes’ inspection of work over which they have taken
infinite pains. They do not object to give reasons for verdicts
if appealed to in a reasonable way. ‘‘ So you have gone against
me, Mr. M.,”’ observed a loser to a judge at a western show
last year, “ but let me tell you that I think my opinion is as
good as yours.”’ “J have no doubt at all you think so,” was the
response, “but, you see, my opinion happens to have the most
weight to-day. Good afternoon.”
5386 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Let my last word on the subject be this:—Exhibitors who
fail to win prizes should search, calmly and patiently, for the
cause of the failure. The losers of to-day, who profit by ex-
perience and persevere, are the winners of the future.
DISQUALIFICATIONS.
Hither through oversight or accident exhibitors’ products are
found at most shows not in exact accordance with the terms of
the schedule: one may have one dish too few or too many, in a
collection; or one fruit too many or too few, ina dish. Has a
judge the right to add to or take from the produce of any
exhibitor? He has no such right. He has nothing whatever
to do with the staging. It is the duty of the show officials to
superintend that. A judge is entitled to draw the attention of
the official in attendance to such defects, and he can make the
correction if he likes. When small devartures are observable
in several or all the exhibits in a class and the show authorities
are satisfied they are pure accidents, and obviously not made
with intention to deceive, the judges are told not to disqualify
but to award the prizes on the merits of the products. That
is simple common sense, which has been described as the best
sense of all.
But in most shows errors are found which cannot be rectified
if the show authorities even desired them to be so. They have
perforce to be passed over by the judges as “‘ out of competition.”’
In most of such cases it suffices to mark the cards “not in
accordance with the schedule.’ If there is reason to believe
that a departure has been made with the intention to deceive,
then the stronger term “ disqualified’? may be employed. This
in the estimation of many exhibitors and visitors implies a
reproach (and perhaps as well so), which the milder term does
not. Recently it was reported that a number of exhibitors were
‘‘ disqualified ’’ because their products were not named. If the
schedule distinctly stated that disqualification must follow on
such omission the judges had no option; if not, it was an
unusual proceeding. Some names are so grotesquely spelt, and
attached in so slovenly a manner, that it would be better if there
were no names at all. If all unnamed exhibits were disqualified
there would be something like a smash at many shows. While
:
dl
~
IES an
Ts rer
CHRYSANTHEMUM SPORTS. 537
it may be well to have “a giant’s strength it is not always wise
to use it as a giant,’ but discriminate.
Everyone interested in the subject of horticultural exhibitions
and schedules should closely study the R.H.S. Rules for Judging,
as many small points of very great importance are embodied
therein.
Toe Enp at Last.
It will be observed if there is one injunction more prominent
than another in this, I fear, tedious paper, it is the importance
of attending closely to small matters by committees, secretaries,
stewards, exhibitors, judges. The full significance of so-called
trifles has been more forcibly expressed by the poet Young than
anything that I can say. It is condensed in three lines, with
wisdom in every word :—
“Think nought a trifle, though it small appears ;
Sands make the mountains, moments make the years,
And trifles, life.’
CHRYSANTHEMUM SPORTS.
By the Rev. Prof. Gzo. Henstow, M.A., V.M.H., F.L.S., &e.
[Read December 14, 1897.]
INTRODUCTION.
Accorpine to Mr. W. B. Hemsley’s investigations, our garden
Chrysanthemums of Eastern origin consist of two species,
C. indicum, L., a small yellow flowered species; and the larger
flowered C. Morifoliwm* (sinense, Sab.). The former appears
to be origin of the Pompon varieties; the latter, together with
possible hybridisations, the source of the larger flavoured
Chrysanthemums.
The immense variety now existing among these flowers is
partly the result of the numerous crossings and recrossings
which have been made between variously coloured ones, coupled
with subsequent dissociations of colour and reversions to more
primitive types, and partly to seminal variation.t
No microscopic differences of importance are to be detected.
* The earliest reference (1696) gives the name Matricaria japonica,
maxima, flore roseo. See Gard. Chron. Nov. 23, 1889.
_ { Lhave to thank numerous correspondents for the examples herein
given of the various sports with which they have kindly supplied me, as
well as many interesting observations upon them.
Q
588 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
_ The changes are mostly in the colouring matters of the cell-sap
alone. These may be in a single layer, or one coloured layer of
cells may be superposed on another, their colours becoming
thereby blended.
With regard to the supposed evolutionary sequence of colours
in flowers, I will here quote what I have written elsewhere * :—
Botanists are pretty well agreed in their belief that yellow
was the primitive colour of true flowers, which were first
evolved through the missing links between Gymnosperms, i.e.
Firs and their allies, and Angiosperms, which include all other
flowering plants; then pinks, reds, mauves, purples, and lastly
blues were gradually acquired; though as yet the last colour
has not appeared in the genus before us.
When, therefore, a coloured or white Chrysanthemum sports
to yellow, which is frequently the case, it may be regarded as
a reversion to the typical or original colour indicated by the
name Chrysanthemum, 7.e. a Gold-flower.
White is, of course, the arrest of all colour, and Mr. Forsyth
observes + :—‘‘ It appears that lilac flowers are the most sportive,
and that they frequently change to yellow.... Also that
nearly all the colours are capable of sporting to white,” the
exception being the primitive colour, yellow; the nearest
approach to this is perhaps seen in the early flowering Madame
Desgrange, the flowers of which open ofa sulphur yellow, but
change toa pure or nearly pure white in the fully expanded
flower.
Mr. John Salter mentions the peculiarity of some Chrysan-
themums of sporting and then reverting :—‘ The variety called
‘Changeable Buff’ is a remarkable instance of this, and has
been known to produce on the same plant buff as well as rose-
coloured flowers; another season the blooms from the same
root have been entirely buff, while the following year every
flower has been rose. The same mutability occurred in the
sulphur variety, which was apt to change, either wholly or in
part, to golden yellow, and after a lapse of time to return to its
original colour, as is sometimes the case with ‘ Formosum.’”’ ¢
* “Chrysanthemum Sports.’”’ A paper read at the Conference of the
National Chrysanthemum Society, Noy. 10, 1891. Paragraphs from that
paper are embodied in the present one.
+ Gardeners’ Magazine, April 20, 1872.
t ‘“ The Chrysanthemum,” p. 41.
CHRYSANTHEMUM SPORTS. 5389
That climate has something to do with some changes seems
borne out by a fact lately recorded, though it may be only
temporary in the case in question. Mr. EK. Hughes-Gibb thus
writes (November 20, 1897) *:—‘‘ We have had little frost here
(Tarrant Gunville, near Blandford, Dorset) and many flowers
which are ordinarily out of bloom at this season still persist.
The changes, however, in their normal colours are in some cases
very remarkable. The Red Cactus Dahlias are blooming almost
orange, the outer florets being often nearly yellow. These
Dahlias are also, in many cases, showing a tendency to revert to
the single form. A species of Tropzolum, normally vivid scarlet,
is blooming in a cool greenhouse, where air is kept on, and has,
in some cases, reverted almost to a clear yellow, a streak of
red down the centre of the petal being the only remains of its
normal coloury. . . . A species of Myosotis, ordinarily of a deep
and very vivid blue, is flowering nowa clear rosy pink, without
the least tinge of blue. . . . Lastly a pure white Phlox of dwarf
habit shows a tendency to revert in some of its blooms to a
greenish yellow hue.”
Sports FROM YELLOW.—Commencing, then, with the
presumably primitive colour, yellow: Of thirteen examples of a
flower of one tint of yellow, the sport has assumed another tint
of yellow; and the rule appears to be that the colour is intensi-
fied in the sport, as may be gathered from the addition of some
qualifying word to the original name. As ammonia is well
known to deepen colours, we may see here a possible cause. It
will apply to other colours as well as yellow, as, e.g., the red in
Balsams, &c. Phosphoric acid also enhances the inflorescence
of plants; so that we may get a hint as to phosphate of
ammonia being a probably useful ingredient for improving the
tone of colourisation in Chrysanthemums.
The following are examples of yellow sports, arising on
plants bearing yellow flowers, but of a different and generally a
lighter shade :— -
* Nature, vol. lvii. p. 100.
+ Ihave constantly noticed scarlet Tropewolums when spared by the
frost turn yellow as the autumn advances.—Eb.
Q 2
540 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
YELLow to YELLOw.*
Annie Salter ; : . Sport, Orange Annie Salter.
Mme. Loderan (sulphur) : : » Mrs. M. Russell (deep yellow).
Golden Empress of India . », Mrs. Robinson King (deep yellow).
Mme. Desgrange (sulphur to white) » Mrs. Burrell (pale yellow).
- Ke » G. Wormig (yellow).
G. Wormig (yellow) ‘ : ; , H. Hawkins (golden yellow).
Lord Alcester (primrose) . , John Lambert (straw).
Miss M.A. Haggas . : : » Rd. Parker.
Mr. G. Glenny (sulphur) . ‘ », Golden Geo. Glenny.
Golden Beverley . ‘ , ,, Mr. Bunnf (deeper yellow).
Dr. Brock (orange yellow) : : », Golden Dr. Brock.
Primrose League . ; : 4 ,, A.H. Wood (light yellow).
Bronze Sprorts.— Though bronze-coloured sports have
arisen from plants bearing yellow flowers, yet, as will be
seen, they appear to come more readily on plants with pink
flowers :—
YELLOW to Bronze.
Mrs. Norman Davis (golden yellow) Sport, Chs. Gibson (deep bronze red,
with cinnamon fawn centre).
Jardin des Plantes (yellow) . ‘ , Bronze Jardin des Plantes.
Mr. Bunn (yellow) . : ‘ : ,, Beauty of Hull (bronze).
Sports FRoM Reps.—These may be of various tints, and are
common. Reds appear to have followed yellows in the natural
evolution of colours, but, as a rule, the groups of reds and
their allies, which include purples and mauves, are due to
coloured fluids, in the cells, whereas yellows are due to solid
eranules. As with yellows, so with reds a common form of
sport is simply a deepening of the tint + :—
Reps, &c., to Reps, &c.
Prince of Wales (dark violet a i Sport, Cobay (ruby red).
Queen of England . , » Alfred Salter.
Miss Mary Morrant (pink) . , Mrs. Marigold (flesh-coloured).
Dr. Sharpe (crimson purple) . . » . Smith (crimson).
Novelty (blush) ; , : : ,, Alfred Lyne (rose-lilac,
Viviand Morel (mauve) . : », Lady Hanbare (cerise).
Miss V. Tomlin (violet purple) ‘ » Lucey Kendall (coral red).
Princess of Wales (rosy blush) , » Miss V. Tomlin (violet purple).
Surprise (rosy flesh) : ; . 5, Gainof the Museum (deep lilac).
The last, mentioned by M. Carriére in 1856, bore in 1862
one branch with pure white flowers; on another were flowers
* The total number of sports recorded in this paper is 100; so that the
number in each group is the percentage of that kind, and shows the degree
of frequency.
t+ A root-sport.
t Haworth, in a paper on Chrysanthemums in the ‘ Horticultural
Cabinet ”’ for 1833, p. 73, mentions that the “ rose’’ or ‘‘ pink ”’ sports to
“ paler pink ”’ for “‘ deeper pink,” also to buff, copper, or light orange, and
thence to bright yellow, 7.e. complete reversion.
CHRYSANTHEMUM SPORTS. 541
half-rose and half-white. Both varieties were permanently
retained by budding.
The next important change is from pink to bronze. These,
as stated, are much more numerous than are bronze sports from
yellow-flowered parents :—
Pink, &c., to BRoNzE.
Lady Hardinge . ; ; . Sport, Mrs. W. Shipman.
Princess of Wales. : : » Mrs. S. Coleman.
Princess Beatrice - ; : » Geo. Cockburn.
Prince Alfred . ; , : » Lord Wolseley.
Blushing Bride . ‘ : : », Bronze Bride.
Lady Slade (lilac pink). , ,, Angelina (golden amber bronze,
shaded with cinnamon).
Prince Alfred (rose-crimson) . » Lord Wolseley.
Queen of England (blush) ‘ , Bronze Queen of England.
Robt. Pitfield . ; ; » Geo. Haigh.
Viviand Morel (mauve) - ‘ »» Ch. Davis (bronzy rose).
Wm. Tricker. ‘ » Mrs. E. S. Trafford.
Mrs. C. H. Payne (rose pink) : » Mrs. G. W. Palmer.
Baronne de Prailley (pale rose) ,, Carew Underwood.
As an example of a converse to the preceding sports, the
following case may be mentioned :—
Bronze to Rep.
Lord Brooke (orange bronze) . Sport, Mrs. J. Cooper (dull crimson).
Five instances are recorded of a buff or fawn-coloured sport
appearing on a rose or bronze-flowered parent.
Rost or Bronze to Burr or Fawn.
Triomphante (white shaded rose) . Sport, A chestnut buff.
Empress Eugénie (rose lilac) . . 4, Fawn-coloured.
Robt. Pitfield (rose) . : : . 4, Geo. Haigh (bronzy buff).
Bronze Queen of England F . 5, John Doughty (delicate fawn,
shaded with light bronze).
Hero of Stoke Newington (rosepink) ,, Lady Dorothy (palecrimson buff).
As illustrations of true reversions from red to yellow, the
original colour of the flowers of the Wild Chrysanthemum, there
are the following examples :—
Rost or Pink to YELLOW.
Wm. Tricker (pink) ; : . Sport, A yellow.
Ch. Davis (bronzy rose) . } » Sellow.*
M. G. Grunerwald (pink) . J ., -. Yellow:
Mary Anderson (blush) . ; » Miss Annie Holden (yellow).
GREEN Sports.—The strange reappearance of the most
* The reverse of the florets a primrose shade. B.M., Jour. Hort. Dec.
1897, p. 532.
542 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
primitive colour (green) is now well established. This reminds
one of the green rose, in which chlorophyll has retaken posses-
sion of all the floral appendages, and the flower thus becomes
foliaceous or ‘‘leaf-like.’’ In the ‘‘green’’ Chrysanthemum the
corollas are only ‘‘sub-virescent”’ (somewhat green) without
being foliaceous. Green flowers are, however, not always due
to chlorophyll; for Professor Church has discovered that the
blue-green colour of the flowers of a species of Ixia is due to a
modification of the common blue or purple colour of many other
flowers, &c. ; but in the case of Chrysanthemums it is probably
the presence of chlorophyll which accounts for the green hue.
WuitE Sporrs.—By far the, commonest kind of sport upon
Chrysanthemums bearing flowers of pink or rose shades of
colour is to a nearly or quite pure white. The following are
examples :—
Pink, &c., to WHITE.
Queen of England . Sport, Empress of India.
Princess of Wales : » Mrs. Heale.
James Salter : : ,, Lady Selborne.
Christine (rosy blush) . » White Christine.
Venus (violet) ; : » White Venus.
Bouquet Fait (rich rose) » Mrs. Eorton (cream).
Wm. Tricker ; », A pearly white.*
Hero of Stoke Newington ,, Creamy white.
Viviand Morel F 3) ) Wirttesr
M. G. Grunerwald ; » White.
The absence of all colour may probably appear in the flowers
of sports and seedlings of all plants; and what has been
discovered is its great use in intercrossing; for, to speak meta-
phorically, it hasthe power of breaking up compound colours.
Thus the old bronze Abutilon striatum produced no change
until it was crossed with a white flowered seedling. This mixed
colour then gave rise to pure pinks and yellows. The same
result has occurred in Begonias and E. I. Rhododendrons.
With regard to variations from white flowered Chrysan-
themums, there are numerous instances of the appearance of
yellow sports. Such is, of course, a restoration or reversion to
the primitive type of colour. Madame Desgrange normally
changes on expanding from a sulphur yellow to white; so
* Mr. W. Buffham has forwarded me a nearly white sport from Wm.
Tricker this year, and observes: ‘“‘The same plant has also produced one
bloom half-yellow. This year the flowers are very pale, but scarcely white,
and at present do not show any yellow.” Nov. 24, 1897.
+ W. Butfham, 1897.
CHRYSANTHEMUM SPORTS. 548
that it is not surprising to find it sporting to a good
yellow :—
Waitt to YELLow.
Elaine . ‘ . Sport (yellow).
Vesta . : : » (yellow).
Mrs. Rundle . : » (deep yellow).
Princess Planche . » veanette Sheahan.
La Triomphante . », Golden yellow * (light yellow).
Mme. Carnot i » o& G. Warren.
Christine : ,, Miss Alice Robertson.
Meg Merrilies » Mr. Ralph Brocklebank.
Lady Selborne ; », Helen Selborne.
Primrose League .
altitudes. MM. Bonnier and Flahault have shown that this is
indirectly due to the enhanced assimilative powers of the foliage
in consequence of the prolonged sunlight, by means of which the
flower-making and flower-colouring materials are increased.
Oxidisation under the action of light has been thought to be
another cause of change in colour, as in the case of the change-
able Hibiscus, which is white in the morning, pink at noon, and
bright red by sundown. Again, a species of Phlox with pink
flowers is of a light blue colour at first at 5 a.m., but by 9 or 10 a.m.
acquires its proper colour, the clump which catches the sun’s
rays first being the first to change, as is also the case with
Chrysanthemums. Thus the variety already alluded to, called
the Changeable Buff, introduced by Reeves in 1824, commences
yellow, but passes into a pinky orange as the flower expands.
Again, the magnificent Etoile de Lyon bears two kinds of flowers,
the crown or single buds being nearly a pure white, while
terminal buds are described as a lilac-rose. One cannot as yet
assign any definite cause to account for these differences, but
can only suggest that they may be due to some obscure differences
in nutrition. Mr. Lowe describes Titania as a sport from the
white Pompon Modéle. It has blooms which are white at first,
and then become pink, with the centre of the bloom remaining
white.* Again, Mr. Buss speaks of Lady Dorothy as being of a
pretty tint of fawn flushed with pink. When grown for late
flowering, and with all its flower buds left on, it comes more of
a yellow colour than fawn, apparently indicating a tendency to
reversion. I remarked that the colours of flowers are due to
chemical substances organised by the plant itself; and Professor
Sachs came to the conclusion that it is the ultra-violet rays of
the solar spectrum which have some special power in making
flower substances. We know very little about these particular
rays in their relation to plant life; but judging from the fact
* Gard. Chron. Feb. 23, 1878, p. 242.
CHRYSANTHEMUM SPORTS. 549
that flowers so often fail to be produced in even very moderate
shade, coupled with the intensity of colours in high alpine
flowers, which enjoy a clear, uninterrupted atmosphere, we can
at once realise the importance of bright and prolonged sunlight.
It must be remembered, however, that light itself has little to do
with the actual making of the flowers. This depends entirely
on the foliage; so that for fine flowers one must see that the
foliage can do its work to perfection; especially that the surface
of the leaf is not begrimed with soot, &c., but well cleansed, if
necessary, with soap-and-water. Although we have no direct
control over climatal conditions, we can do what we like with
the soil. We can impoverish it or enrich it, or supply any
special ingredients we choose. Such undoubtedly affect the
colouring of flowers, and apparently the power of sporting as
well. To give one or two examples:—Mr. Hovey said,* that
striped Dahlias will be best kept clean by planting them in a poor
soil, while a rich soil invariably runs them. I believe this —
treatment is well known to florists, and generally adopted for
other plants as well. As another result of impoverishment, Mr.
Lowe describes a number of sports of Chrysanthemum, as having
been, as he surmises, actually caused by it.t ‘‘ Two years ago I
treated the plants badly ; they were never potted off, and took
care of themselves as best they could in an orchard; they never
bloomed that year, and were all but killed. I cannot help
thinking that this has been the cause of many of the sports.’’
A hint from Mr. Burbidge ¢ corroborates Mr. Hovey’s remarks on
Dahlhas, when writing about the fixation of sports :—‘‘It is
advisable to grow cuttings of sports in such a way as to ensure
the full development of all the flower-buds they form ... and
so prove them to the core, as sports often revert to the parent
type. Now to do this it is advisable to grow them in a poor
soil, without stopping . . . and to take care to give them no
more pot-room than is needful for fair growth, but at the same
time taking care: not to starve them out of constitution.” I
find a corroboration of this in Sharrock’s work, already referred
to. He says:—‘“ Seeing it is evident that variety of colours
sometimes cometh from the weakness of the plant, some art
* “Magazine of Horticulture” (quoted in Gard. Chron. 1842, p. 8).
+ Gard. Chron. San. 5, 1878, p. 18.
t “The Chrysanthemum,” p. 46.
550 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
may be used to alter the colours, not only of offsets and slips,
but also of the flowers that arise from mother plants [2.e.
sports]... . The expert gardener endeavours to recover sickly
roots of choice flowers, and purposely he infects others with sick-
ness ... by taking up the roots a little before they come to
flower, and laying them in the sun to abate their luxury, and to
cause them to come better marked the year following ”’ (p. 98).
I quote these few cases of the effects of a poor soil to show that
erowers have found out by experience, if not by experiment, at
least something towards the production and fixation of sports.
On the other hand, nutrition enhances the intensity of colourisa-
tion.
—]
wi
2
Fia, 12.—Grovup oF Orcuips, SHOWN By Messrs. LinpEN & Co.
To Messrs. Linden, 1l’Horticulture Internationale, Pare
Leopold, Brussels, for Orchids. (Fig. 12.)
THE TEMPLE sHow, 1897. XxX1
To Messrs. Dobbie & Co., Rothesay, N.B., for Violas, and
Pansies. ~
To Sir J. W. Pease, Bart., Hutton Hall, Guisboro’ (gr.
Mr. MeIndoe), for Fruit.
To Mrs. Wingfield, Ampthill House, Beds (gr. Mr. Empson),
for Fruit and Vegetables.
To Sir W. G. Pearce, Bart., Chilton Lodge, Hungerford (gr.
Mr. C. Beckett), for Fruit.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for new Plants.
(Fig. 13.)
To Messrs. Carter & Co., High Holborn, for Calceolarias and
Gloxinias. (Fig. 15.)
To Mr. Charles Turner, Slough, for Roses.
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for Caladiums and Begonias.
To Messrs. Jones & Sons, Shrewsbury, for Decorations.
To Messrs. Cannell & Sons, Swanley, for Begonias, Calceo-
larias, Cannas, and Gloxinias.
To Messrs. Sutton & Sons, Reading, for Begonias, Caladiums,
and Flowering Plants. (Fig. 17.)
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. J. Cypher, Cheltenham, for Orchids.
To Mr. H. J. Jones, Ryecroft, Lewisham, for Begonias, &c.
To Mr. J. R. Box, Croydon, for Begonias.
To Mr. T. 8. Ware, Hale Farm, Tottenham, for Begonias, &c.
(Fig. 18.)
To Messrs. James & Son, Farnham Royal, for Calceolarias.
To Messrs. Cutbush & Son, Highgate, for Carnations.
To His Grace the Duke of Marlborough, Blenheim (gr.
Mr. Whillans), for Carnations. (Fig. 19.)
To Guildford Hardy Plant Nursery for Hardy Plants.
(Fig. 20.)
To Messrs. J. Waterer & Sons, Bagshot, for Rhododendrons
and Japanese Maples.
_ To Messrs. J. Peed & Sons, Norwood, for Gloxinias and
Caladiums. (Fig. 16.)
To Earl Percy, Syon House, Brentford (gr. Mr. Wythes),
for Orchids and Fruit.
To Mr. H. B. May, Edmonton, for Ferns, &c.
To Messrs. Fromow & Sons, Chiswick, for Japanese Maples.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
XX11
MNUOLY TD (8.l0Uud".LD4)
“WOASOIDHdS WAIACVI
» ALiavy { Usss ] A AOHS Qo SsvVviu lou: vO
o7@) UaLu 0 Sut a Al ’
SPNVTOSI IVS
THE TEMPLE sHoW, 1897. XXV
To Messrs. Cripps & Son, Tunbridge Wells, for Japanese
Maples, &e.
To Messrs. Wills & Segar, Onslow Crescent, South Kensington,
for Palms, &e.
To Mr. W. Rumsey, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
To Messrs. Kelway & Son, Langport, Somerset, for
Peonies, &c.
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Fic. 16.—Nrw Canapium “ Tuomas PEep.”’
"SNOG =? NOLLAG ‘sussay_ AM NMONS ‘SVINIXOINN—" LI “PIA
5'‘NDOND]
‘slueay g uospnil
THE TEMPLE sHOW, 1897. XXVll
To Mrs. Phippen, Reading, for Decorations.
To Mr. Moyses Stevens, Victoria Street, S.W., for Decorations.
To Mrs. W. Green, Romford, for Table Decorations.
To Messrs. Perkins, Coventry, for Decorations.
To Miss M. Foden, for Table Decorations.
To Sir F. Wigan, Clare Lawn, East Sheen (gr. Mr. W. H.
Young), for Orchids.
To Messrs. Lewis & Co., Southgate, for Orchids.
“ “> ' * + * Re: Fi ' q
? pe Sees :\
oo b pteas
Fic. 18. - DousLE BrGontas, sHown By Mr. T. S. Ware.
Silver-gilt Knightian Medal.
To Messrs. Bunyard, Maidstone, for Fruit Trees in Pots,
Apples, &c.
Silver-gilt Banksian Medal.
To Pantia Ralli, Esq., Ashsted Park, Epsom, for Caladiums.
To John T. Bennett-Poé, Esq., Cheshunt (gr. Mr. Downes),
for Florist’s Tulips.
To Messrs. W. & J. Birkenhead, Manchester, for Ferns.
To Mr. W. Iceton, Putney, for Foliage Plants.
EDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
yy
4
PROC!
XXV111
“HYOOUOMTYV]Y 10 AMONG AHL AT NMOHS “SNOILYNUVO NOSIVINIVIY—'6T ‘P17
“AUGSUON INVIG AGHVYF GuNOAaTINH AHL AC GAONVUUY AUTMIOY—'0] “OL
oz re eSBs “ele
si Bins J ‘
ot Nt Sate a
~
ory
ee)
re
3
)
=
nN
ca
=
¥
Ln]
a)
3
B
fe)
=
=)
XXX. PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Mr. George Featherby, Gillingham, Kent, for Grapes, &c.
To Marquis of Northampton, Castle Ashby (gr. Mr. Hayes),
for Vegetables.
To Mr. J. Prewett, Hammersmith, for Table Decorations.
To Mr. L. H. Caleutt, Stoke Newington, for Floral
Decorations.
To Messrs. B. 8. Williams, Upper Holloway, for Orchids.
To W. A. Gillett, Esq., Bishopstoke, Hants (gr. Mr. E. Carr),
for Orchids.
To Welbore Ellis, Esq., Hazlebourne, Dorking (gr. Mr.
Barrell), for Orchids.
To W. Thompson, Esq., Stone, Staffs (gr. Mr. Stevens), for
Orchids.
To Messrs. R. Smith & Co., Worcester, for Clematis.
(Fig. 21.)
To Mr. M. Prichard, Christchurch, for Herbaceous Plants.
To Messrs. Balchin & Sons, Hassocks, for New Holland
Plants.
To Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley, for Herbaceous Plants.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Jackman & Son, Woking, for Clematis and Herb-
aceous Flowers.
To Mr. B. Ladhams, Shirley, Southampton, for Hardy
Flowers.
To F. Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Manchester (gr. Mr. Stafford),
for Orchids.
To Messrs. W. Brown & Sons, Stamford, for Cut Flowers.
To Mr. H. O. Garford, Stoke Newington, for Decorations.
To Messrs. Edwards & Son, Sherwood, Notts, for Decorations.
To L. Mond, Esq., Regent’s Park (gr. Mr. Clarke), for
Orchids.
To Mons. E. Piret, Argenteuil, France, for Orchids.
To Mr. John Forbes, Hawick, N.B., for Carnations.
To Mr. G. Stevens, Putney, for Carnations.
To Mr. A. W. Young, Stevenage, for Gloxinias, &e.
Silver Knightian Medal.
To Mons. A. Belin, Argenteuil, France, for Asparagus.
To Mr. F. Chapman, Colchester, for Asparagus.
THE TEMPLE SHOW, 1897. XXXl
a i
ihe.
i oe
Fic. 21.—CLematis, sHowN By Messrs. RicHarp SmitH & Co.
XXXil PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Messrs. Laxton Bros., Bedford, for Strawberries. -
To the Horticultural College, Swanley, for Vegetables.
To Mr. W. W. Palmer, Andover, for Strawberries.
Silver Banksian Medal,
To Malcolm §. Cooke, Esq., Kingston (gr. Mr. Buckell), for —
Orchids.
To Major James Joicey, Sunningdale (gr. Mr. Thorne), for
Orchids.
To Mons. A. A. Peeters, Brussels, for Orchids.
To Messrs. R. & G. Cuthbert, Southgate, for Azaleas.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE,
JANUARY 12, 1897.
Mr. MicnHaEt in the Chair, and six members present.
Tomatos Diseased.—lt was reported from Kew that the
specimens exhibited at the last meeting were too much de-
cayed to be able to ascertain what fungus, if any, had caused
the disease.
Senecio multiflorus, Hybrids —Mr. Lynch exhibited a
number of specimens which he had raised by crossing 8. multi-
florus with various forms of the garden or cultivated Cineraria.
The colours much resembled those of the latter plant, the
foliage being intermediate, and the height about 3 feet. All
but one had §, multiflorus as the female parent, the results
showing therefore great prepotency on the part of the male
(Cineraria). 5. multiflorus was first introduced from the
Canaries in 1855 (“ Bot Mag.” tab. 4994, Doronicum Bourgi).
It was subsequently lost from Kew and reintroduced to Cam-
bridge by Mr. Gardener in 1895. Some of the flowers showed
a peculiar circular white spot on the red tip of the petals.
Cineraria cruenta.—Mr. Douglas said that he is raising
seedlings of this plant, in order to see if it varies towards the
cultivated forms without being crossed. Mr. Lynch observed
2.9
:
q
.
7
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9. XXxxill
that C. Tussilaginis was a species which apparently most nearly
resembled the cultivated Cineraria.
White Narcissus, Artificially Colowred.—Dyr. Russell ex-
hibited some cut flowers of white Polyanthus Narcissus, which
he had placed in solutions of acid red magenta (Judson) dye,
and in acid green. The colours had traversed the fibro-vascular
cords, and then spread over the intermediate tissues, forming a
border round the ends of the petals. He proposes investigating
the matter to try and discover the general nature of those
colours which will act in this way. It took from 12 to
15 hours to infuse the perianths. Mr. Henslow remarked
that John Laurence in his book on gardening (1726), says that
people in his day used to colour flowers by letting the roots lie
in a solution of the lees of claret.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9, 1897.
Dr. M. T. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair.
Coniferous Woods.—Dr. Masters exhibited specimens of
Deodar, Larch, and Cedar of Lebanon, grown by Mr. J. Simpson
at Wharncliffe. They were said to have been planted at the
same time, about thirty years ago. It was remarkable that the
heartwood of the larch and deodar were much alike, while
that of the cedar was different, in not being so darkly coloured
as the others. ‘The quality was in each case good, especially
that of the larch. It has been observed by Dr. Tristram that
the wood of the cedars grown on Mount Lebanon is much
closer in grain and darker in colour than that of trees grown in
England. (‘The Nat. Hist. of the Bible,’’ p. 343.)
Species of Thuya.—Dr. Masters also exhibited specimens
from Mr. A. D. Webster and others, illustrative of the con-
fusion in the nomenclature of this genus. He observed that
T. occidentalis grows in the Atlantic States of North America,
and T. gigantea (Lobbi) on the north-western or Pacific side.
A form originally named T. plicata was introduced at the end
of the last century by Menzies from Vancouver. In Donn’s
“ Catalogue of the Plants of the Botanic Gardens at Cambridge ”’
this plant is recorded, but without description. As this is a
western species, it is really synonymous with, or at most, a
)
XXXIV PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
variety of what is now generally called T. gigantea. But the
original T. plicata having probably died out, the name has now
become transferred to a form or variety of T. occidentalis from
the Atlantic side of the United States. It is probable that both
species are represented by a “ plicata”’ variety; but it is not
certain whether the Pacific variety is now in cultivation. Speci-
mens of the original plicata from Vancouver are in the Her-
barium of the British Museum, so that it is a question whether,
strictly speaking, the name T. gigantea should not be super-
seded by that of T. plicata. The plant now bearing that name
should then be called T. occidentalis var. plicata.
Sisal Fibre.—A sample of this fibre extracted from Agave
sisalana was received from Mr. W. Floyer, of Basingstoke. It
was grown at the experimental farm at Mualla, near Luxor, by
Mr. E. A. Floyer, of Cairo. He hopes to grow enough to supply
all the bags for Egyptian sugar, cotton, &c. The fibre is very
white, and extremely strong. The Governor of Malta is anxious
to introduce the cultivation of this Agave into that island ;
but as all the uncultivated parts of the island consist of hard,
exposed rock it is doubtful if it would pay, even if the climate
proved suitable. The name was given to the fibre imported from
Yucatan (“ Kew Bull. of Misc. Inform.,’’ March 1887).
ScieNnTIFIC CoMMITTEE, Marcu 9, 1897.
Dr. M. T. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair, and eight members
present.
Beetles with Grapes.—Mr. McLachlan had received some
small beetles found about the roots of Vines, about a quarter of
an inch long, with a blunt thorax and rather sluggish in manner.
They proved to be Trox sabulosus, and were introduced in the
crushed bones used for manure. Not being vegetable feeders
they do no harm to the Vines. The best trap would be a dried
rabbit skin with the inner side downwards.
Larve of Daddy Longlegs.—He also received a sample of
propagating soil in which Iceland Poppies were grown, abounding
with the larve of this fly. Bisulphide of carbon, cyanide of
potassium (4 to 1 per cent. solution in water), or to remove the
soil and burn it, were methods recommended in such cases.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, MARCH 23. XXXV
Apple Root with Adventitious Buds.—Dr. H. Miller exhibited
a specimen, thickly covered in places with innumerable buds,
usually known as “ Burr Knot.” The original cause is obscure,
but Dr. Masters observed that such roots are often cut up and
used for propagating.
Hyacinths, éc., with Root Failure.—A collection of bulbous
plants were received from Mr. W. C. Atkinson of Aiglwith,
Liverpool, in which the roots had been very imperfectly
developed, and then arrested and decayed. Mr. Douglas under-
took to investigate the case, Dr. Masters observing that the
bulbs might not have been properly ripened before lifting.
Drift Wood from Arctic Seas.—Dr. M. T. Masters exhibited
specimens of wood obtained by Dr. Nansen. They had travelled
from Siberia to Franz Joseph Land, and consisted of the Siberian
Pinus cembra (dwarf form), Willow, Elm, &c.
ScIENTIFIC CoMMITTEE, Marcu 23, 1897.
Rev. W. Dop in the Chair, and six members present.
Bulbs with Arrested Roots.—With reference to the samples
sent to the last meeting by Mr. Atkinson, Mr. Douglas was of
opinion that the treatment had perhaps not been quite advisable,
for he thought that they should have been put out of doors, and
not in a shed, and covered with 6 inches of cocoa-nut fibre. If,
however, there was something deleterious in the compost sent for
inspection, this could be at once ascertained by analysis.
Wireworms among Carnations.—Myr. Weguelin of Torquay
asked for remedies against this trouble. The suggestions of lin-
seed cake, carrot, scooped out potatoes, as for slugs, &c., were
made, but it would appear that in the present case the wire-
worms were too numerous for any such like traps. Gas lime
was recommended as the only now efficient remedy, but it might
injure the Carnations. The land having been well dressed with
lime or soot shows that these ingredients are quite insufficient,
though gas lime would probably have been effective.
Carnation Leaves Diseased.—Mr. Fagents of Honey Pots,
Westfield, Woking, sent some leaves with peculiar red streaks
02
XXXV1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
upon them. They were forwarded to Kew for further investi-
gation.
Germination of Mushrooms.—Inquiries were made by Mr.
Baker, of Cobham Park, as to somewhat contradictory statements
in books upon this subject, as in Mr. J. Wright’s “ Primer of
Horticulture’ it is stated that it has been observed, whereas in
Dr. Scott’s ‘‘ Flowerless Plants’’ (page 268), it appears to have
never been seen. Mr. W.G. Smith, having been, appealed to by
the Secretary for his opinion, writes as follows :—‘I have many
times seen the spores of the Mushroom and its allies germin-
ating. With me they have often quickly germinated on glass,
and more often on moist blotting paper. The fungi must be
allowed to shed their ripe spores on to the moist paper. After a
day or two a damp microscopic slide must be placed upon the
part of the damp paper where the spores have fallen, and it will
often happen that some will be found to have germinated. I
have seen the germinating examples whilst drawing the spores
with a camera lucida. ... Messrs. Wood of Wood Green
managed to get spawn of the Morel (from material sent by me)
to germinate and form spawn. I once exhibited before the R.H.S.
examples of Coprinus atramentarius raised by me from spores.
This species can be easily raised (and it is not very far removed
from the Mushroom) from spore to perfect fungus. The time it
takes is three months. I believe some of the French manu-
facturers of Mushroom spawn have raised Mushrooms direct
from the spores. The spores of some of the allies of the Mush-
room germinate readily in expressed juice of horse dung. I have
many times seen them, and am not the only person who has
seen them on glass.”
Trametes radiceperda, Hartig.—Dr. Plowright sent a specimen
of this fungus “to illustrate the mode in which it developes its
hymenophore upon the roots of an affected Scotch Fir. The
hymenium is resupinate. The fungus finds an entrance into the
roots of living Fir trees by the extremities of the mycelian hyphze
insinuating themselves between the bark scales. It rapidly
extends between the living bark and wood, and soon reaches the
wood itself, which if at once destroys. The mycelium can travel
in the ground from tree to tree.”’
Barley-smut.—Dr. Plowright also sent the following com-
munication upon the injurious effect of this fungus upon the
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, MARCH 23. XXXVIl
colour of the crop. “It is only a few years ago—a very few
when one looks back upon it—that our attention was drawn by
Mr. J. L. Jensen of Copenhagen to the fact that there are two
distinct kinds of smut upon Barley. At first there was a con-
siderable disinclination to regard these two smuts as being due
to two distinct species of Ustilago; but since they are not only
easily distinguishable by the unaided eye, but also differ in the size
and form of their spores, and as the latter have been found to
germinate in a totally distinct manner, there is now no doubt
about it. Our American confréres at the time repeated the
protective measures suggested by Mr. Jensen, and confirmed their
efficacy; but here the matter stopped, for the simple reason that
the damage done by smut was trivial, and from a monetary point
of view the dressing of seed Barley was a needless expense. A
few days ago a circumstance came under my notice which
materially alters the complexion of the case. A gentleman who
is rather an extensive grower of Barley in West Norfolk drew my
attention to the fact that two years ago his Barley was of an
excellent colour, while it was in the stack; but when it was
threshed it was so discoloured that he had to accept a very low
price indeed for it. He attributed the damage in colour to the
number of smutted ears which remained intact when the crop
was harvested, but which, by being broken up in the process of
threshing, discoloured the whole sample, just in the same way as
bunted Wheat does. Fortunately he had kept some of this
discoloured Barley. On inspection it looks as if it had been
damaged by exposure to the weather. When a little of it, how-
ever, is shaken in a test tube with clean water the water becomes
discoloured, and a drop placed under the microscope is seen to
be full of Ustilago spores. So convinced was this gentleman of
the cause of the discoloration that in the next season he dressed
his seed Barley with the ordinary sulphate of copper dressing,
which is used for seed Wheat for the prevention of bunt. The
result was eminently satisfactory; for that year his crop was
free from the disease, and the grain, of good colour, realised a
proportionately good price. The ordinary Ustilago carbo, as it
used to be called, has no detrimental effect on Barley, beyond
destroying a certain percentage of plants, its spores being all blown
away long before the harvest; but with the species in question,
which, by the way, has received already a considerable number
XXXVill PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
of names—Mr. Jensen originally called variety tecta—the ears
retain their shape, the awns do not fall off, and the kernels are
converted into solid compact masses of black spores; not so
compact, however, as to withstand the concussion of the threshing
machine without being disintegrated into fine powder, which
becomes scattered over the healthy kernels.”” With this com-
munication were received :—‘ (1) Specimen of the compact form
of Barley-smut, gathered on the 15th of last July, at which time
the common Barley-smut had all disappeared from the field.
(2) Three samples of Barley, two of which are discoloured by the
smut, as may be shown by shaking them in water and examining
the washings. (3) A sample of healthy Barley from which no
spores could be washed.”’
A vote of thanks was unanimously given to Dr. Plowright for
his interesting communications.
Portugal Laurel with Defective Foliage.—Reyv. W. Wilks
showed branches, one healthy for comparison, the other showing
a silvery appearance. It is a well-known case, and apparently
attributable to defective nutrition. The peculiarity resides in
the fact that the upper epidermis becomes detached, and the
presence of air gives the whitish appearance. The palisade
tissue also separates readily from the mesophyll, and its cells are
easily broken asunder. There is no trace of fungi or other
organism. Mr. Henslow observed that a tree in his garden
exhibited the same appearance and died. Its roots were found to
have penetrated pure gravel.
ScrentTIFIC CoMMITTEE, APRIL 18, 1897.
Dr. M. T. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair.
Mushrooms Raised from Spores.—With reference to this
subject, the following communication was received from Dr.
D. H. Scott :—‘* Mr. Massee, of Kew, has referred me to what
seems to be a thoroughly successful solution of the problem,
how to raise Mushrooms from spores. Two French authors,
Costantin and Matrachot, have raised five varieties true from
spores, carrying on their culture in sterilised food solutions, and
subsequently on sterilised manure. The whole development is —
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, APRIL 13. XXX1X
said to take from six to seven months.” (‘‘Comptes Rendus,”’
vols. 117 and 118, 1893-4.)
Wireworms, Cure for.—With reference to this, discussed at
the last meeting, Dr. Masters remarked that mustard as pow-
der, or dug in green, had proved to be effective in destroying
this pest.
Daffodil with Frilled Corona.—Dr. Masters exhibited a
blossom having this peculiarity which occurs also on Cyclamens,
Primroses, &e. The structure of the fibro-vascular cords is
peculiar in the Daffodil in having its elements reversed in posi-
tion from those of the perianth itself. It was received from
Mr. Dick, of the firm of Messrs. Cooper, Taber & Co.
Anemone fulgens.—He also showed specimens of this flower
from the Riviera, and also the Greek form with rounded sepals.
Several of the former were becoming double, just as is the case
in South of France. Dr. Masters observed that the wild
Anemone, A. nemorosa, had become double in his garden after
some years’ growth. Mr. Henslow added that the same had
occurred with him; specimens originally single, received ten
years ago from woods in Wiltshire, were now semi-double.
Larve of Bibto.—Myr. McLachlan observed that an error
occurred in the statement about propagating soil containing the
larve of daddy-longlegs in the report of the meeting on March 9.
It should have been that of a species of Bibio.
Tulip Leaves Diseasedi—Mr. F. W. Thomas, of Wannock,
near Polegate, Sussex, sent specimens of leaves showing discolo-
ration. They were forwarded to Kew for examination.
Cineraria cruenta.—Mr. Herrin, of Dropmore, sent speci-
mens of the original form of this plant, exhibiting different
shades of colour as well asa cross between it and the garden
form. The latter was of a deep crimson tint.
Daffodils synanthic.—Rev. C. W. Dod sent two specimens,
each consisting of two flowers, of which the stalks were fused
for the entire length from base to flower; they were the var.
Empress. He observes that in one case ‘‘ the union was by a
superficial membrane only; but in the other the combination
was complete, the joint scape being hollow at the base, without
any visible joining.”’
Earthnuts.—Mr. Wilks broaght specimens of this umbellifer,
which is common in the woods and hedges and open hills about
xl PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Croydon, the tubers being much eaten by children in that neigh-
bourhood. He remarked that two children, of the ages two and
ten, had lately died, apparently poisoned by eating the leaves of
some wild plant, but its nature could not be discovered.
ScIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, APRIL 27.
Dr. M. T. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair, and two members
present.
Tulips Diseased.—With reference to the Tulips ‘“ Golden
Crown”’ sent to the last meeting by Mr. Thomas of Polegate,
the following is the report received from Kew :—‘ The leaves
are attacked by a fungus called Botrytis vulgaris, a destructive
parasite to various bulbous plants. The mycelium of the fun-
gus travels down the tissues of the host plant and forms minute
sclerotia in the bulb and also in the soil in which the plant is
growing. These sclerotia remain dormant during the winter,
and commence to grow the following spring when the young
leaves appear. Your correspondent is right in supposing that
he will get no blooms. The wisest thing to do would be to
remove all the diseased plants. It would not be wise to plant
bulbs in the soil where the diseased plants have grown for the
next two years. If this cannot conveniently be avoided, then
let him plant ‘ trap-plants ’—that is, comparatively worthless
bulbs—to take up the spores and sclerotia present in the soil,
and then remove them early in the summer before more sclerotia
or spores are formed.”
Podisoma sabineg.—Mr. E. Pollard, of Colwall, Great Malvern,
sent a specimen of Savin having the yellow jelly-like outgrowth
of this fungus from the stem. It is dimorphic, the second stage
being called Restelia cancellata and is found growing on rosa-
ceous trees.
Pinus Torreyana.—Dr. Masters exhibited specimens of the
large cones of this tree. It was found on the extreme southern
coast of California, extending over about three to four miles
only, and the group consisted of from 200 to 800 trees. It has
since been discovered on the island of Santa Roza off the same
coast. It is now in cultivation.
Iilies Diseased.—Mr. Noy, of Brentford, sent some Lilies.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, MAY 11. xli
Some grown on land heavily manured with sewerage matter
and ashes; others on land which had not been manured for
several years, being a very light soil. They were attacked with
a species of Peronospora, allied to the Potato disease; so
possibly a treatment similar to that for Potatos might be
advantageous.
Tulip with Axillary Flower—My. Townell, of Heaton,
Newcastle-on-Tyne, sent a specimen of the Tulip ‘“‘ Proserpine,”
in which an additional small flower sprang from the axil of a
leaf on the scape. It is not a common production, but similar
growths occasionally occur.
Cineraria Crosses.—Messrs. James & Son, of Farnham Royal,
sent several fine grown plants, which they had raised (1)
between Cineraria cruenta crossed with garden forms, and four
plants (2, 3, 4, 5), resulting from this; also (1) again crossed
with C. Heritieri (6); also this last true species crossed with the
first named (1). It had white flowers, with pink tips to the
petals. Of the four plants, numbered 2, 8, 4, 5, No. 2 had
foliage more resembling that of C. cruenta, but 3, 4, and 5 that
of C. Heritieri, while three had a white ray and pink disk; 5
had both ray and disk of a crimson colour.
ScIENTIFIC ComMItTEE, May 11, 1897.
Dr. M. T. Masrsrs, F.R.S., in the Chair, and seven members
present.
Weevils on Fruit Trees.—Mr. Rbt. Smith, of Shrewsbury,
forwarded some living specimens received by him from Mr. J.
Jones, Chelmick Pools, Church Stretton. They were described
as attacking Plum and Apple grafts, Roses and Raspberry buds
They proved to be Otiorrhynchus pisipes. The trees and bushes
might be sprayed, though a better plan is to shake the boughs
over a large sheet of paper, in which they can be caught and
then destroyed.
Birch Branch with Phytoptus.—Dr. Masters showed speci-
mens illustrating the early stage of the attack on boughs by this
insect. It is not often the commencement of the so-called
“ Witch Brooms” can be detected as in this instance.
Abies bracteata.—He also exhibited sprays of this handsome
xii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
tree, remarkable for the silvery under surface of the leaves,
which are about 3 inches in length. It bears large male cat-
kins, and elongated pointed buds. It is a native of S. California.
It is remarkable that it fails to flower on the Atlantic side of
N. America.
A. Menziesii.He also showed a bough of this splendid
timber tree from Vancouver.
Petalless Apples——Flowering shoots of the Ecklinville
(Seedling) Apple were received, remarkable for having no petals.
They were sent from the Glewstone Gardens, Ross. There were
600 bushes of twelve years’ growth, all being similarly affected.
No particular cause could be suggested.
Double Narcissus.—Dr. Masters showed a single and double
flower of a N. incomparabilis, of a somewhat novel character.
The perianth consisted of twelve pieces regularly arranged in
“threes.” The short cup-shaped corona as well as the stamens
were totally absent; but the styles above the tube were free and
petaloid, suggesting the normal condition in an Iris.
Sclerotia (?).—Mr. M. Taylor, of the Gardens, Penbidw Hall,
Nannerch, sent some remarkable specimens of a fungus con-
sisting of large branching lumps, which appeared in a Mush-
room bed. They were forwarded to Kew for investigation.
Improved Method of Grafting.—Mr. Robt. Smith, of Brad-
well Villas, Bishop Street, Shrewsbury, sent a number of
specimens of grafts, illustrating a newmethod. This being, that
in preparing the scion, while one “ tongue’”’ is inserted as usual,
the opposite half of the scion is carried over the flat top or
‘‘crown,’’ and inserted on the opposite side, or two grafts may
be thus inserted on opposite sides of the stem, the result being,
as shown in the specimens sent, that the summit is completely
covered in with new growth. This was seen in small specimens
of whip-grafting, but none were sent to show how far large
crowns would become covered over. Another advantage arose —
from the new method of preventing loss of grafts by wind
breakage, for it thus gave a better and stronger union. It was
thought by Mr. Douglas that it was a decided improvement
upon the old method, as long as the scion and stock were of the
same size; but further information was desirable as to the
success when the surface of the stock much exceeded that of
the scion. (Figs. 22 to 26, pages lii-ly.)
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, JANUARY 12. xliii
Double White Auricula.—Myr. R. Dean sent a plant, which
was the result of fifteen years’ selection from a single white
variety ; the petals were not of a pure white, but slightly
yellowish-green tint.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE.
JANUARY 12, 1897.
Puitip Crow ey, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-four members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Knightian Medal.
To Messrs. Bunyard & Co., Maidstone, for 100 dishes of
Apples, and 10 dishes of Pears.
Silver-gilt Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a collection of
Apples and Pears.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Cannell & Son, Swanley, for a collection of
Potatos.
Award of Merit.
To Apple ‘Belle de Boskoop’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. Both in flavour and
appearance this new Apple reminds one of ‘ Hambledon deux
ans.’ Of good size and quality, flattish, russety, and tender in
the flesh.
Culiwral Commendation.
To Mr. Wythes, gardener to Karl Percy, Syon House, Brent-
ford, for Tomato ‘ Syon Prolific,’ being across between ‘ Duke of
York’ and ‘Ham Green.’
Other Exhibits :—
W. H. Evans, Esq., Ford Abbey, Chard (gr. Mr. J. Crook),
xliv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
sent a dish of ‘ Wellington’ Apples (syn. Dumelow’s Seedling).
Probably the finest coloured dish of this variety ever seen.
The Hon. Henry Butler, Nydd Hall, Ripley, sent Apple
‘September Beauty.’ |
Messrs. Young & Dobinson, Stevenage, sent 24 dishes of
Potatos.
Lady Emily Foley, Stoke Edith Park (gr. Mr. Ward), sent a
seedling Apple, very pretty, but quite past its best.
Mr. G. Fulford, Damerham, sent a dish of Pear ‘ Doyenné
d’Hiver,’ which is one of the many names of the well-known
‘Kaster Beurré.’ The fruits were of very large size, and delicious
in both quality and flavour.
Messrs. James Veitch & Sons sent Apple ‘Fraise d’
Hoffinger,’ a very pretty fruit indeed, and of good quality, but
wanting in flavour. Also Apple ‘Standard Bearer,’ which
received an Award of Merit in 1898. The fruits were of good
size, conical, with a slightly rough, greeny yellow skin, and firm
yellow flesh ; of good quality, and very fair flavour.
Mr. Henry Sheppard, Bedford, sent under name ‘ Sheppard’s
Nonpareil,’ a dish of Apples which the Committee considered to
be ‘ Scarlet Nonpareil.’
Lord Suffield, Gunton Park, Norwich (gr. Mr. Allan), sent
for correct name a dish of Pears which Mr. Allan had obtained
under the name of ‘ Crassane,’ by grafts from a tree fifty years
old at Blickling. The variety was quite unknown to the Com-
mittee, but the fruits resembled what one would expect from a
cross between ‘ Hacon’s Incomparable ’ and ‘ Winter Nelis.’
Mr. John Wright exhibited some preserved Dates sent to him
by Lionel Sandars, Esq., one of her Majesty’s judges in Egypt.
Writing from Ramleh, Egypt, Mr. Sandars says:—“*I am
sending something which I think you have never tasted before
—preserved Dates—which should be eaten at dessert like ginger.
I am always surprised that people in England know nothing
about them, and cannot help thinking it would pay someone to
import them. They improve by keeping.”’
This being the last meeting of the Season 1896-7, the Chair-
man said that he wished in his own name, no less than in that
of the Council, to thank all the members most sincerely for
the great pains they had taken, and the attention they had
bestowed on the work that had come before them.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9. xlv
A hearty vote of thanks was subsequently passed by acclama-
mation to the Chairman and the Secretary for the impartial,
courteous, and efficient manner in which they had performed
their duties towards the Committee.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9, 1897.
Puinip CRow LEY, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-four members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Knightian Medal.
To Messrs. Cheal & Son, Crawley, for 60 dishes of Apples.
Silver Knightian Medal.
To Messrs. Rivers & Son, Sawbridgeworth, for 80 dishes
of Apples, and a large number of Oranges of different varieties.
Award of Merit.
To Avple ‘Prince Edward’ (votes, 12 for), from Messrs.
Rivers & Son. Judging simply by its appearance, this new
Apple might very well be a cross between ‘Cox’s Pomona’ and
‘Cellini.’ It is said to be a very good bearer, and is of a nice,
brisk flavour, and wonderfully soft and melting.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. G. Harvey, gardener to Major Thornhill, Stanton
Hall, Bakewell, for two plates of exceedingly fine Lemons grown
on the back wall of a vinery.
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. Rivers & Son sent Apple ‘Carmenal’; flattish and
much striped at the base. Also Apple ‘St. Martin’s’; a very
sweet, pleasant, and soft-eating variety, dark in colour, and
conical in shape. It received an Award of Merit on Novem-
ber 24, 1896.
Messrs. Young & Co., Stevenage, sent 386 varieties of
Potatos.
James Watson, Esq., sent Apple ‘ Bramley’s Seedling.’
xlvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
FRvuIT AND VEGETABLE ComMITTEE, Marca 9, 1897.
Mr. GrorGe Bunyarp in the Chair, and twenty members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Knightian Medal.
To K. Dresden, Esq. (gr. Mr. J. C. Tallack), Livermere Park,
Bury St. Edmunds, for 30 dishes of Apples and Pears.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To. C. J. Massey, Esq. (gr. Mr. James Day), Garliestown,
Wigtonshire, for a collection of Apples.
To Mrs. Wingfield (gr. Mr. Empson), Ampthill, for a collec -
tion of Fruit and Vegetables.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Wythes, gardener to Earl Percy, Syon House, for
Asparagus forced in the open air by a simple covering of leaves.
To Mr. Wythes, for Chicory forced in the same way.
To Mr. Hudson, gardener to Messrs. de Rothschild, Gunners-
bury House, for a box of Apples ‘ Newton Wonder.’
Other Exhibits.
R. R. Taylor, Esq., Westbury, Wilts, sent some specimens of
grafting and budding, in which a short length of indiarubber
tube took the place of grafting wax or any other covering
material.
Mr. W. J. Brown & Co., Stamford, sent Apple ‘ Lavender's
Seedling’ (see November 10, 1896)-—quite of the character of
‘Wyken Pippin,’ and possibly a cross between it and ‘ Blenheim
Orange.’ An Award of Merit was proposed, 7 voting for it, and
10 against.
Mr. John Watkins sent his new Apple ‘Lord Hindlip’ to
show how well it keeps. It was very fine and solid, and still of
very good flavour.
Mr. Geo. Lovelock, Normanton Park, Stamford, sent Apple
‘Diamond Jubilee ’—very like ‘ Royal Somerset’ in appearance,
and with exactly the flavour of ‘ Wellington.’
rT
%
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, MARCH 238, xlvii
Captain Carstairs (gr. Mr. Ross) sent Apple ‘ Mottled Russet ’
—of very fair flavour, but somewhat lacking in quality.
Messrs. Lane & Son, Berkhamsted, sent Apple ‘St. John’s
Seedling,’ which too much resembled ‘ Hormead Pearmain.’
Mr. E. Holder, Grosvenor Cottage, Bath, sent a seedling
Apple somewhat in the way of ‘ Court of Wick.’ It was crisp,
juicy, and of fair flavour, but had possibly been gathered too
soon.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, Marcy 23, 1897.
Puitie CRowLeEy, Esq., in the Chair, and eighteen members
present.
After the minutes of the last meeting had been read the Chair-
man called on the Secretary, the Rev. W. Wilks, to move a resolu-
tion. The Secretary, rising, said :—‘‘ Mr. Chairman and gentlemen
of the Fruit Committee,—We have all of us, I am sure, come here
to-day with very contradictory feelings. We one and all want
to get up and bear testimony to the great loss which this
Committee has sustained since last we met; and yet we one and
all shrink from doing so from a feeling (which I share with
everyone of you) that there is not one among us capable of doing
justice to the theme. In one sense, then, I shrink from the sub-
ject as from a task too hard for me to perform—a burden I am
unequal to bear ; whilst, in another sense, I feel that the duty
which the Chairman has deputed to me is the greatest honour
he could confer upon me. Gentlemen, we have lost one whom
all who knew him at all intimately loved sincerely ; whom all at
this table reverenced ; whom every English gardener honoured ;
whom all pomologists in every country of the world looked up to
and respected as the chief authority on fruit—our dear friend
and coadjutor Dr. Hogg—the founder of this Committee—who
has been taken from us. But what a splendid work and what a
grand example he has left behind! Seldom has it been given to
aman to reduce to such (comparatively speaking) perfect order
such an absolute chaos as he found British fruit description and
nomenclature. The greatness of his work in this respect is not
yet fully realised. A Scotchman by birth, and like so many
Scotchmen, of untiring energy and dogged perseverance; a man
of transparent honesty of purpose and of blunt outspoken truth-
xlviii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
fulness; he hated hypocrisy and sham, whilst his heart was
simply overflowing with kindness and gentleness and sympathy.
He was not like any other man. He had a very marked indi-
viduality ; a sort of solidity and terseness of expression, both in
word and manner, which was reflected in the picturesque rugged-
ness of his outward form, reminding one nota little of the
massive, open, wind-swept, heather-clad hills of his own Scots’
land. No one who ever saw him could possibly forget him, or
mistake him for any other; and no one who really knew him
but now feels he has one staunch and true friend the less.
Gentlemen, we cannot but mourn for Dr. Hogg; but even
whilst we mourn let us not forget to thank God truly for the
man, and for sparing him to us for almost fourscore years. I
beg to propose the following resolution :—‘ The Fruit Committee
of the Royal Horticultural Society desire to record upon their
minutes the profound estimation in which they hold the life and
work of the late Dr. Hogg. The Committee recognise with
eratitude that Dr. Hogg’s life was one of unceasing benefit to
the best interests, not only of British pomology, but also of the
pomology of the whole world. Wherever fruit is grown for the
benefit of mankind, there for generations yet unborn will the
name of Dr. Hogg be known and honoured. The Committee
can find no words to express the greatness of the loss which they
in common with all English-speaking fruit growers have
sustained by the death of one whom all who knew him held so
dear ; they are forced to content themselves with placing upon
record their deep sense of the inestimable privilege they have
enjoyed in being associated on this Committee for so many years
with so kindly and eminent a man.’”” The members uncovered
during Mr. Wilks’ remarks, and the resolution having been
seconded by T. Francis Rivers, Esq., was accepted unanimously
in mournful silence.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To Apple ‘ King’s Acre Pippin’ (votes, 12 for), from the
English Fruit Co., Hereford, supposed to be a cross between the
‘Sturmer’ and ‘ Ribston’ Pippins. Fruit medium sized, oblate,
slightly angular, heavily covered with russet, especially on the
upper side, lower side clear; stalk thin, half an inch long,
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, APRIL 13. xlix
deeply inserted; eye partly open, set in a shallow, puckered
cavity ; flesh greenish yellow, tender, sweet, and with somewhat
the flavour of ‘ Sturmer,’ but intensified.
Other Exhibits.
The English Fruit Co. also sent a dish of very brilliantly
coloured Apples, under the name of ‘ Kcklinville.” The Com-
mittee were sure it was not ‘ Ecklinville,’ but were unable to
recognise it.
W. J. Clarke, Esq., Binbrook, Market Rasen, sent three
apples for name ; one was recognised as ‘ French Crab,’ another
was considered to be a local seedling of little value, but the third
was a small but exceedingly firm, crisp, juicy, dessert apple,
which for the end of March was excellent.
FRuIT AND VEGETABLE CoMMITTEE, APRIL 138, 1897.
Puinie CROWLEY, Hsq., in the Chair, and seventeen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Knightian Medal.
To Earl Percy (gr. Mr. Wythes), Syon House, for a beautiful
collection of early Vegetables with Figs and Strawberries.
Silver Knightian Medal.
To Mrs. Wingfield (gr. Mr. Empson), Ampthill, for a collec-
tion of Vegetables.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To the Duke of Rutland (gr. Mr. Divers), for a collection of
Apples.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Farr, gardener to A. Pears, Esq., Isleworth, for a
basket of new and old Grapes.
Other Exhibits. -
Mr. Harris sent from Roseville, Jersey, five enormous Pears
under name ‘ Belle de Jersey,’ which the Committee considered
to be ‘ Uvedale’s St. Germain.’
From W. H. Evans, Esq. (gr. Mr. Crook), Forde Abbey,
P
l PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
came dishes of ‘ Dumelow’s Seedling’ and ‘Sturmer’ Apples and
an Onion named ‘ Forde Long-keeping.’
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. Bain), Burford, sent a
bundle of ‘Anserine Bon Henri.’ It consists of the young ©
shoots of a plant Chenopodiwm Bonus Henricus, which grows
wild in many parts of England, and is extensively cultivated by
cottagers in Lincolnshire and elsewhere under the various names
of ‘ Perennial Spinach,’ ‘Good King Henry,’ ‘ Lincolnshire Mer-
cury,’ ‘ Algood,’ &c. It is perfectly hardy, and is said to be very
palatable as a first early Spring Vegetable.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CoMMITTEE, APRIL 21, 1897, aT
CHISWICK.
Puitie CROWLEY, Esq., in the Chair, and thirteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
First Class Certificate.
To Radish ‘ Deep Scarlet Olive Shaped Extra Early’ (votes,
unanimous), from Messrs. Vilmorin, Quai de la Mégisserie, —
Paris.
To Radish ‘White Olive Shaped Extra Early’ (votes,
unanimous), also from Messrs. Vilmorin.
These two radishes were proved to be the earliest of all and
were ready for use in five weeks from the date of sowing.
Award of Merit.
To French Bean ‘Ne plus ultra’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, and Messrs. Watkins &
Simpson, London.
To French Bean ‘ Karly Favourite’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. James Veitch & Sons. |
To French Bean ‘Improved Mohawk’ (votes, unanimous),
from Mr. Geo. Wythes, Syon House Gardens.
To French Bean ‘ Emperor William’ (votes, 9 for, 4 against),
from Messrs. Benary & Co., Erfurt.
To French Bean ‘Golden Wax Pod’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden.
a
a nD MD te
i lied
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, APRIL 27. li
The above Beans were found to be the best for forcing,
together with ‘Osborn’s Forcing,’ which had received F.C.C.
in 1873. For Report on Forcing Beans see page 139.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, APRIL 27, 1897.
Puintie CROWLEY, Esq., in the Chair, and sixteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Earl Percy, Syon House (gr. Mr. Wythes), for a collection
of vegetables and fruit.
[The Council on the report of the Chairman awarded a Silver
Knightian Medal to this collection. |
Award of Merit.
To Dessert Apple ‘Haster Orange’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Hillier & Son, Winchester. For the time of year an
Apple of very good flavour and of tender flesh, not unlike ‘ Cox’s
Orange,’ but more distinctly conical and more evenly streaked
with crimson and orange colour all over. Stalk very short and
deeply inserted. Hye very like that of ‘ Cox’s Orange.’
Other Exhibits.
From the Royal Gardens, Windsor, Mr. Owen Thomas sent
specimens of his new yellow Tomato ‘ Royal Windsor,’ which
received an Award of Merit, August 5, 1896. It is a cross
between ‘ Golden Queen’ and ‘ Frogmore Selected.’ It isa fruit
of excellent flavour, and though somewhat like ‘ Blenheim
Orange’ in appearance was considered to be both larger and
better. Mr. Thomas also sent a new Strawberry ‘ Sir Trevor,’
a cross between ‘ La grosse Sucrée’ and ‘ Royal Sovereign.’ The
variety did not seem to be as yet quite fixed, as some of the fruits
were of pale flesh with indented seeds and some dark-fleshed with
prominent seeds. All the fruits were very handsome, and the
pale-fleshed ones of fine flavour like ‘ Royal Sovereign.’
Messrs. Hurst & Sons sent a fine Broccoli under name
‘ Hurst’s Karly April.’
ae
li PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Mr. M. Russell, Farnborough, sent a new Strawberry ‘ Early
Giant,’ a cross between ‘Paxton’ and ‘Noble.’ Fruits very
large and of fine colour but terribly rugose and irregular in form,
and not overburdened with flavour.
Earl Percy (gr. Mr. Wythes) sent both old and new Grapes—
‘Lady Downes,’ still plump and good, and ‘ Black Hamburg’
and ‘ Foster’s Seedling’ from young pot vines.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CommiITTEE, May 11, 1897.
Puinie CRowLEY, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-two members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Kmghtian Medal.
To Mrs. Wingfield (gr. Mr. Empson), Ampthill House, for a
collection of Vegetables.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Wythes, gardener to Karl Percy, Syon House, for
Figs ‘ Brown Turkey,’ ‘St. John’s,’ and ‘ Violet Sipor.’
Other Exhibits.
J. Rylands, Esq. (gr. Mr. Backham), Longford House, Ryde,
sent a Cucumber ‘Longford Hall,’ raised from ‘ Rochford’s
Market’ x ‘Improved Telegraph.’
R. Burrell, Esq. (gr. Mr. Bishop), Westley Hall, Bury St.
Edmunds, sent an unnamed Melon raised from ‘ Westley Hall’
x ‘High Cross Hybrid.’ The fruit sent was a very large one,
white fleshed, very deep in the flesh, excellent flavour for the
time of year. An Award of Merit was proposed but lost, 7
voting for and 11 against. The Committee considered that so
early in the season probably but scant justice had been done to
the variety and desired to see it again, requesting that an
ordinary-sized fruit should be sent.
Mr. M. Russell sent two large boxes of the same Strawberry
which he sent to the last meeting.
R. P. Jenkins, Esq. (gr. Mr. Turnbull), Beachey Lodge,
Gloucester, sent some excellent and very well grown Asparagus,
from a bed which was said to be 100 years old.
a,
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, MAY 11. liii
The Duke of Northumberland (gr. Mr. Leach), Albury Park,
sent an Apple ‘ Miller’s Seedling’ of excellent flavour, but rather
hard and tough as to quality.
Earl Percy (gr. Mr. Wythes), Syon House, sent a box of
‘Hales Early’ Peach.
Mr. Robert Smith, Bishop Street, Shrewsbury, sent specimens
Fic. 22.—Oup AND DEFEcTIVE MeETHop.
of his system of grafting, which the accompanying woodcuts,
kindly lent by the Gardeners’ Chronicle, will best explain. It
was considered excellent when the wood to be grafted was of any
age. (See figs, 22 to 26.)
Fic. 23.—NrEw MeEtTHop, sHOWING GRAFT IN POSITION BEFORE IT IS WAXED.
Fic. 24.—Smatzt Branches GRAFTED AND
Fic. 25.—New Mernop, Grart co
READY FOR WAXING.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, MAY 11. lv
Fic. 26.—Nrew Meruop, sHowinc Grast artTeR Frrst YEar’s GRowTH.
lvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CoMMITTEE, May 26,1897. Trempre
GARDENS.
Puitiep CROWLEY, Esq., in the Chair, and fourteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :— [For other Awards see p. xvii.]
First Class Certificate.
To Tomato ‘Golden Jubilee’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
Owen Thomas, gardener to Her Majesty at Windsor. This
Tomato received an Award of Merit under the name of ‘ Royal
Windsor ’ on August 5, 1896 (see Vol. xx., pt. 2, p. exxxiv). At
Mr. Thomas’s request the Committee, in voting F.C.C., also
changed the name to ‘Golden Jubilee.’ This is probably the
finest Tomato, for eating as a fruit, that has ever been raised,
its flavour being delicious. [See p. li.]
Award of Merit.
To Melon ‘ Diamond Jubilee’ (votes, 9 for), from Hon. G. M.
Fortescue (gr. Mr. Herrin), Dropmore. A round, scarlet fleshed
fruit, well netted, and of excellent flavour and very sweet; the
result of a cross between ‘La Favorite’ and an unnamed
seedling.
Other Exhibits. [See also p. xvii.]
W. H. Evans, Esq. (gr. Mr. Crook), Forde Abbey, sent a
Strawberry ‘ Forde Abbey Seedling’ which was considered too
like ‘ Royal Sovereign ’ to merit an Award.
Messrs. Laxton, Bedford, sent a Strawberry ‘ Early Laxton,’
a cross between ‘Mr. Ruskin’ and ‘ Royal Sovereign.’ It was
desired that it might be tried at Chiswick.
Mr. Owen Thomas sent Cauliflower ‘Thomas’ Early,’ which
was considered too near to ‘ Karly Dwarf Erfurt.’
Mr. Palmer, Andover, sent some remarkably fine ‘ Royal
Sovereign’ Strawberries, which had been grown as follows :—
“The runners were layered in the open ground on an allotment
and lifted early in August and planted in another allotment; but
having put up a house for Tomatos it occurred to me that I
might turn the Strawberries to a good account if they were
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JANUARY 12. lvii
potted and placed on the shelves. So I had them lifted barely
six weeks ago, with a good ball, potted in ordinary mould mixed
with a little road grit, bone meal, and vine manure. Since they
commenced to swell I have watered three times with a little
sulphate of ammonia; the crop now is enormous and is a
splendid sight.”’
A. Henderson, Esq. (gr. Mr. Meades), Buscot Park, Faringdon,
sent a very interesting group of Melons.
Lord Braybrooke (gr. Mr. Vert), Audley End, sent a Melon
‘ Audley End Favourite.’
FLORAL COMMITTEE.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, JANUARY 12, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-one members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park, Ascot (gr. Mr. Thorne),
for Cyclamen.
To N. L. Cohen, Esq., Englefield Green, Surrey (gr. Mr.
Sturt), for Freesias.
To Messrs. Cannell, Swanley, for Primulas.
To Mr. John May, Twickenham, for Cyclamen.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Cutbush, Highgate, for a group of Cyclamen, &c.
Award of Merit.
To strain of Cyclamen papilio (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
De Langhe, Rue de Constantinople, Brussels. A strain with
large broad fimbriated petals.
Botanical Certificate.
To Senecio Seedlings (votes, unanimous), the result of crossing
Senecio multiflora with the garden Cineraria, from R. I. Lynch,
Ksq., Botanic Gardens, Cambridge.
lvili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Other Exhibits.
J. Bradshaw, Esq., Southgate, sent a well-flowered plant of
Veltheimia viridifolia.
J. W. Thompson, Esq., Coniston, sent a plant of Nephrolepis
nanus. The Committee asked to see it again.
Messrs. William Paul, Waltham Cross, exhibited a plant of
Crategus Carrierei bearing a profusion of yellow fruits. The
Committee asked to see the plant when in flower.
From Mr. Crook, Forde Abbey, came a few Cyclamen.
Messrs. Cripps, Tunbridge Wells, exhibited the winter-
flowering Hamamelis arborea, and Violet ‘Admiral Avellan.’
The Committee asked to see the Violet again.
Chrysanthemums were exhibited by :—
(1) Earl of Jersey, Osterley Park (gr. Mr. Hawkes).
(2) The Hon. G. M. Fortescue, Dropmore (gr. Mr. Herrin).
(3) Mr. Owen, Maidenhead.
(4) Mr. Wells, Redhill.
FLoRAL CoMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-six members
present.
Awards Recommended :
Silver-gult Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Cannell, Swanley, for Primulas.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Low, Clapton, for Cyclamen.
To Messrs. Peed, West Norwood, for a group of foliage and
flowering plants.
To Mr. C. Turner, Slough, for Cyclamen.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Earl Percy, Syon House, Brentford (gr. Mr. Wythes), for
a group of forced plants—Staphylleas, Azaleas, Prunus sinensis
fl. pl., Tulips, and Hyacinths.
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for a group of Dracenas,
Ferns, Palms, and Orchids.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9. lix
Bronze Flora Medal.
To the Baroness Burdett Coutts, Holly Lodge (gr. Mr.
Willard), for Begonia ‘ Gloire de Sceaux.’
To Messrs. Williams, Holloway, for Azalea Mollis.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Purnell Purnell, Esq., Woodlands, Streatham, for
Narcissi.
To Mr. Ware, Tottenham, for hardy bulbous plants.
To Messrs. Barr, Covent Garden, for hardy plants.
First-class Certificate.
To Lapageria rosea ‘Warnham Court variety’ (votes,
unanimous), from C. J. Lucas, Esq., Warnham Court. A very
handsome and free-flowering variety. The large flowers are
rosy-red mottled with greyish white.
To Iris Bakeriana (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Wallace,
Colchester. A dwarf-growing species of much beauty. Standards
pale blue ; falls whitish-yellow blotched with violet and margined
with deep blue. Very fragrant.
Award of Merit.
To Violet ‘ Admiral Avellan’ (votes, 19 for), from Messrs.
Cripps, Tunbridge Wells. A sweet-scented variety with reddish
purple flowers and vigorous deep green foliage.
Highly Commended.
Exhibit of flowers, dried without pressing, in such a way that
they appeared almost as if recently gathered (votes, unanimous),
from The Floral Preservation Company, 14 Colman Street, H.C.
Other Exhibits.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain), sent
Anthurium ‘ Perfection.’
From Sir J. W. Ramsden, Bart., Byram, Ferrybridge (gr.
Mr. Taylor), came an unnamed seedling Calla.
Mr. Crook, Forde Abbey, sent Violets and Primroses.
Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea, sent a group of hardy
flowering shrubs.
Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, sent Lilac ‘ Madame Lemoine ’
to show its adaptability for forcing.
From Mr. Owen, Maidenhead, came two varieties of Primulas.
Messrs. Young, Stevenage, sent Lilies of the Valley.
Messrs. Sander, St. Albans, sent Utricularia Forgetiana.
a
lx PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Fiuorat CommitTE£, Marcu 9, 1897.
W. Marsuat, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-six members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. William Paul, Waltham Cross, for a group of
Camellias and Roses.
Silver Gilt Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea, for a group of Primulas
and Hippeastrums.
To Messrs. James & Son, Farnham Royal, for Cinerarias.
To the St. George’s Nursery Company, Hanwell, for
Cyclamen.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. Ware, Tottenham, for a group of Narcissi and Alpine
plants.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To the Hon. W. F. D. Smith, M.P., Greenlands, Henley-on-
Thames (gr. Mr. Perkins), for Hippeastrums.
To Mrs. Whitbourn, Great Gearies (gr. Mr. Douglas), for a
group of Cinerarias.
To Mrs. Crawford, Gatton Lodge, Reigate (gr. Mr. Slogrove),
for Cyclamen.
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for a group of foliage and
flowering plants.
To Messrs. Balchin, Hassocks, for Boronias and Primulas.
To Messrs. Cutbush, Highgate, for Carnations, Ericas, and
hardy shrubs in flower.
To Messrs. Barr, Covent Garden, for a group of hardy
flowers.
To Mr. John May, Twickenham, for Cyclamen.
To Messrs. Peed, West Norwood, for Azaleas, Boronias,
Cyclamen, and hardy shrubs in flower.
To Mr. Mount, Canterbury, for Roses.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, MARCH 9. lxi
Bronze Flora Medal.
To Major the Hon. H. C. Legge, Fulmer, Slough (gr. Mr.
Mowbray), for Freesias.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Cannell, Swanley, for Primulas and Begonias.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for a group of Alpine
plants, Roses, and Daphnes.
To Messrs. Cuthbert, Southgate, for Azalea mollis.
First Class Certificate.
To Cotoneaster horizontalis (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Paul & Son, Cheshunt. A freely branched variety of dwarf
habit suitable for growing on the rockery. Its small leaves
assume many shades of chocolate and crimson in theautumn. It
also bears a profusion of bright red berries.
Award of Merit.
To Primula obconica rosea (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
Ware, Tottenham. A form with bright rosy-pink flowers.
To Strain of Cyclamen grandiflora alba (votes, unanimous),
from the St. George’s Nursery Company, Hanwell. Large pure
white flowers of great substance.
To Corylopsis spicata (votes, 8 for, 7 against), from Messrs.
James Veitch, Chelsea. An early flowering deciduous shrub. Its
yellowish green flowers, with conspicuous crimson anthers, are
borne in short racemes.
To Lomaria ciliata grandis (votes, 12 for), from Mr. H. B.
May, Edmonton. A vigorous grower, of good habit, with bright
green fronds; the pinne broad and wavy at the margin
To Chionodoxa Luciliz alba (votes, 15 for, 1 against), from
Messrs. Barr, Covent Garden. A white form of this well-known
spring flower.
Other Exhibits.
H. J. Elwes, Esq., Colesborne, Andoversford, sent a magnifi-
cent spike of Lilium Thomsonianum.
Mrs. Macalister, Bampton, Devon, sent a specimen of Gerbera
Jamesoni.
xii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
From F. W. Moore, Esq., Glasnevin, came a very, interesting
collection of Hellebores, in which were several unnamed seedlings
of much promise.
J. B. Arbuthnot, Esq., Scots Guards, Wellington Barracks,
Westminster, sent an unnamed Calla. |
J. Higgens, Esq., Wimborne, exhibited three plants of an un-
named Violet. The Committee considered it identical with ‘ Lady
Hume Campbell.’
J.J. Rogers, Esq., Chislehurst, sent Hellebores.
Mr. Archer Hind, Fishacre, North Devon, also sent
Hellebores.
Mrs. Charrington, Reigate, exhibited a flowering branch of
Melia floribunda.
Mr. Crump, Madresfield Court, sent specimens of zine
labels.
Mr. Isaac House, Westbury-on-Trym, exhibited a new Violet
‘ California.’
Mr. John Green, Dereham, sent a Primrose ‘ Blue King.’
Messrs. Low, Clapton, exhibited Epacris.
Messrs. Sander, St. Albans, sent Utricularia Forgetiana.
Messrs. R. Veitch, Exeter, sent Viola sulphurea and Prunus
Myrobolano fi. pl.
Mr. C. Turner, Slough, sent Violets.
Prizes.
Class 3.—A group of twelve plants of Lenten Roses (Helle-
borus orientalis and its varieties), containing at least six distinct
varieties. The plants, which will be judged mainly by their fine
growth and abundant blossom, must have been grown entirely in
the open air. To be shown in mossed bundles, baskets, pots, or
tubs. Open. Prizes kindly given by W. Robinson, Esq. First
prize, £7. 7s., to Messrs. George Paul & Son, Cheshunt. Second
prize, £3. 3s., to Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, MARCH 23. xiii
FLORAL ComMITTEE, Marcy 23, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-five members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Cutbush, Highgate, for Hyacinths, Tulips, and
hardy shrubs.
To Messrs. Kerr, Grassendale, Liverpool, for Hippeastrums.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mrs. Abbot, South Villa, Regent’s Park, N. (gr. Mr. Kelf),
for a group of Narcissus, Hyacinths, Tulips, and Lily-of-the-
Valley.
To Mr. Mount, Canterbury, for Roses.
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for foliage and flowering
plants.
To Mr. H. B. May, Upper Edmonton, for Roses and
Clematis.
To the Church Road Nursery Co., Hanwell, for Cyclamen.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Henry Tate, Esq., Park Hill, Streatham Common (er.
Mr. Howe), for bulbous plants.
To Messrs. Peed, West Norwood, for a group of plants.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for a collection of Alpine
plants and Rhododendrons.
To Messrs. Cannell, Swanley, for Begonias.
To Messrs. William Paul & Son, Waltham Cross, for Camellias
and Roses.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Purnell Purnell, Esq., Woodlands, Streatham Hill, for
Primulas.
To Lord Wantage, Lockinge Park (gr. Mr. Fyfe), for
beautiful cuttings of Camellia reticulata and Rose ‘ Fortune’s
Yellow.’
To Messrs. Cuthbert, Southgate, for Tulips.
First Class Certificate.
To Tulipa Kaufmanniana (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
MW)
|
Mi y
i,
Wy)
Fia. 27.—-Tuipa KAUFMANNIANA.
d Y
iii
ht
VPP) '//:)
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
FLORAL COMMITTEE, MARCH 23, lxv
Barr, Covent Garden, and Messrs. Wallace, Colchester. A very
handsome and early flowering species. The large flowers are
borne on stout stems; colour creamy white, the lower portion
being deep golden yellow. Externally the colour is bright
carmine. (Fig. 27.)
Award of Merit.
To Clivia ‘Charles Vermeire’ (votes, unanimous), from
J. T. Bennett-Poé, Esq., Holmewood, Cheshunt (gr. Mr.
Downes). Orange scarlet flowers with a yellow centre borne
in immense trusses.
To Anthurium scherzerianum ‘Geant Sanglant’ (votes,
unanimous), from Messrs. Linden, Brussels. A variety with
large roundly-cordate bright red spathes.
To Erythronium Nuttallianum (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Barr and Messrs. Wallace. Plant of dwarf habit bearing
golden yellow flowers.
To Disporum Leschenaultianum variegatum (votes, unani-
mous), from Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea. The lanceolate
leaves of this handsome Liliaceous plant are soft green, striped
and margined with silvery white.
To Hippeastrum ‘ Pera’ (votes, 14 for), from Messrs. James
Veitch. Flowers large and of great substance; colour orange
scarlet feathered with white.
To Polyanthus ‘ Woodside Red’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. R. Dean, Ealing. Flowers dull crimson laced with golden
yellow.
To Rose ‘ Antoine Rivoire’ (H. T.) (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. C. Turner, Slough. Flowers creamy-blush.
Botanical Certificate.
To Fritillaria alpina (votes, 16 for), from Messrs. Barr.
Other Exhibits.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart, Burford. (gr. Mr. Bain), sent
a beautiful specimen of Eucharyles hybrida. The Committee
asked to see this again. |
From the Duke of Marlborough, Blenheim, Woodstock (gr.
Mr. Whillans), came two Carnations.
Captain Holford, Tetbury, Gloucester (gr. Mr. Chapman), sent
four varieties of Hippeastrums.
Q
lxvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Mr. C. Toryford, Totnes, South Devon, sent an unnamed
seedling Fuchsia.
Messrs, Gordon, Edinburgh, exhibited Alpine plants.
Messrs. Sander, St. Albans, again sent Utricularia
Forgetiana. : |
From Messrs. William Paul, Waltham Cross, came two
Roses ‘Souvenir de Madame Eugéne Verdier’ and ‘Madame
Abel Chateney.” The Committee asked to see these again.
Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea, sent blue Primroses and
hardy flowering shrubs.
W. Marshall, Esq. (Chairman), proposed, and Mr. R. Dean
seconded, a vote of condolence with the widow and family of the
late Dr. Hogg, and that the same be entered on the minutes.
FrorAL ComMiTtTEE, Apkin 18, 1897.
W. MarsuHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and thirty-one members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To J. P. Morgan, Esq., Dover House, Roehampton (gr. Mr.
McLeod), for a large group of Azaleas, Cytisus, Spirseas, Crotons,
Boronias, and Ferns.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Captain Holford, Tetbury, Gloucester (gr. Mr. Chapman),
for Hippeastrums.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for Alpine plants and
Roses.
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for foliage and flowering
plants.
To Mr. Mount, Canterbury, for Roses.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Lord Wantage, Lockinge Park, Wantage (gr. Mr. Fyfe),
for Roses.
To Mr. H. B. May, Upper Edmonton, for Crotons, ee
Begonias, and choice Ferns.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, APRIL 13. lxvli
To Mr. John Walker, Thame, for Roses.
To The Guildford Hardy Plant Nursery, Millmead, Guildford,
for show Auriculas.
To Mr. Rumsey, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
Bronze Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Cutbush, Highgate, for Ericas, Ferns, and hardy
flowering shrubs.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bt., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain), for
Anthuriums.
To E. Mawley, Esq., Rosebank, Berkhamsted, for Roses.
First Class Certificate.
To Erythronium revolutum (votes, 22 for), from Messrs.
Wallace, Colchester. A new and very rare plant. Its beautiful
soft pink drooping flowers are borne on long slender peduncles.
The foliage is dark green marbled with light green.
Award of Merit.
To Solanum tuberosum variegatum (votes, 15 for, 5 against),
from Lord Aldenham, Aldenham Park, Elstree (gr. Mr. E.
Beckett). The foliage is blotched with soft green and creamy
white.
To Hippeastrum, ‘The Czar’ (votes, unanimous), from
Captain Holford, Tetbury (gr. Mr. Chapman). Flowers of
moderate size and good shape, scarlet running to intense
crimson.
To Hippeastrum ‘Chimborazo’ (votes, unanimous), from
Captain Holford (gr. Mr. Chapman). A very fine variety, with
deep crimson flowers.
To Hippeastrum ‘Duke of York’ (votes, unanimous), from
Captain Holford (gr. Mr. Chapman). Flowers, orange scarlet
flushed with crimson.
To Ornithogalum grandiflorum (votes, 20 for, 1 against), from
Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill. Large pure white flowers, borne in
clusters of from eighteen to twenty-five, on scapes eighteen
inches high.
To Muscari conicum (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Barr,
Covent Garden. Deep violet blue flowers on long stout spikes.
Q2
lxvill PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Tropeolum ‘ Phebe’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Cannell, Swanley. A free-growing and free-flowering variety.
The flowers are large with deeply cut petals, colour orange
yellow blotched with crimson.
To Fuchsia ‘ Addington’ (F. fulgens x F. cordifolia
splendens) (votes, 11 for, 5 against), from Messrs. Cannell.
Plant of dwarf habit. The drooping tubular crimson flowers
are borne in great profusion.
To Hippeastrum ‘Thunberg’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
James Veitch, Chelsea. Large, orange red flowers, shaded with
crimson.
To Hippeastrum ‘ Ignacite ’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
James Veitch. Ground colour, white suffused with delicate pink
and feathered with red. Hach segment has a distinct greenish
stripe down its centre.
To Hippeastrum ‘ Brenda’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
James Veitch. Large flowers, of great substance, deep crimson
with a greenish yellow centre.
To Hippeastrum ‘Topaz’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
James Veitch. Orange-scarlet flowers, margined with white and
feathered with white in the throat.
Other Exhibits.
G. Soper, Esq., Harestone, Caterham Valley, sent Dimor-
photheca Ecklonis.
J.C. Parr, Esq., Grappenhall Heyes, Warrington, exhibited
Rhododendron Nuttalli.
Mrs. Crawford, Gatton, Reigate (gr. Mr. Slogrove), sent
Pelargonium ‘ Beauty of Reigate.’
From H. J. Bartleet, Esq., Severndroog, Shooters Hill, came
a very finely grown Myosotis.
W. C. Walker, Esq., Winchmore Hill, exhibited Cannas.
R. B. Leech, Esq., Dulwich, sent a double yellow Wall-
flower.
Mr. Mortimer, Farnham, sent two seedling Coleuses.
From J. H. Arkwright, Esq., Hampton Court, Leominster,
came very fine specimens of Primrose ‘ Evelyn Arkwright.’
G. Webb, Esq., Tunstall House, Sittingbourne, exhibited
sprays of Aucuba Japonica, covered with berries.
EK. J, Lowe, Esq., Chepstow, exhibited similar Aucubas,
FLORAL COMMITTEE, APRIL 27, lxix
A. Methven, Esq., Bayham Abbey, Lamberhurst, sent a
variegated Primrose.
From Messrs. Kelway, Langport, came Double Cinerarias.
Messrs. Sander, St. Albans, again sent Utricularia Forgetiana.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, APRIL 27, 1897.
W. MarsHAtt, Hsq., in the Chair, and twenty-three members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. Mount, Canterbury, for Roses.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. Ware, Tottenham, for herbaceous plants and cut
flowers.
To Mr. Frank Cant, Colchester, for Roses.
To Messrs. Barr, Covent Garden, for Tulips.
To Mr. C. Turner, Slough, for Primulas and Alpine
Auriculas.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for Roses, Amaryllis, and
Alpine plants.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for foliage and flowering
plants.
To Mr. Rumsey, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
To Messrs. Peed, West Norwood, for Ericas, Cannas, Clivias,
and Ferns.
Bronze Flora Medal.
To Mr. C. Turner, Slough, for a group of Malmaison
Carnation ‘ Princess May.’
To Messrs. Cutbush, Highgate, for Azalea mollis.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Mr. H. B. May, Edmonton, for Coleus.
First Class Certificate.
To Rhododendron superbissimum (votes, unanimous)
Ixx PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea. A dwarf-growing hybrid, with
large white fragrant flowers. ,
To Lomaria ciliata grandis (votes, 12 for), from Mr. H. B.
May. (For description, see page 1xi.)
Award of Merit.
To Lomaria ciliata major (votes, 15 for), from Mr. H. B.
May, Edmonton. A very graceful Fern with light green spread-
ing fronds and narrow pinne.
To Primula Trailli (votes, 10 for, 3 against), from G. F.
Wilson, Esq., Weybridge. The delicate pink fragrant flowers of
this new Himalayan species are borne on long scapes and hang
in clusters of from four to seven. (Fig. 27.)
To Lithospermum tinctorum (votes, 17 for), from J. T.
Bennett-Poé, Esq., Holmewood, Cheshunt (gr. Mr. Downes). A
very beautiful plant of dwarf habit, with small, deep blue
flowers.
To Tropeolum ‘Mrs. Sanderson’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mrs. Sanderson, The Mount, Ealing (gr. Mr. Wood). Deep
crimson flowers, borne freely and thrown well above the foliage.
The habit of the plant is dwarf and compact.
The Morus alba pendula (votes, 12 for), from Messrs. Paul &
Son, Cheshunt. A weeping form of the white Mulberry.
To Auricula ‘ Fred. Knighton’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
R. Dean, Ealing. Flowers borne in dense trusses, colour
reddish crimson, with a clear yellow eye.
Cultwral Commendation.
To Mrs. E. Powys Rogers, Burncoose, Perranwell, Cornwall,
for very fine specimens of the New Zealand Forget-me-not,
Myosotidium nobile.
Other Exhibits.
J. T. Bennett-Poé, Esq., Holmewood, Cheshunt (gr. Mr.
Downes), sent plants of Arctotis Aureola.
From David Kemp, Esq., Bricket Wood, St. Albans, came a —
specimen of Cyrtanthus Mackenni.
Mr. C. Orchard, Bembridge, I.W., sent a bunch of Wall-
flower ‘ Harper Crewe.’
W. E. Denison, Esq., Ossington Hall, Newark, sent a Golden
Oalla.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, APRIL 27. lxxi
Messrs. Williams, Upper Holloway, sent seedling Hip-
peastrums.
From Messrs. Laxton, Bedford, came Lilies of the Valley.
Fic. 28.—Primvutaf Train. (Journal of Horticulture.)
Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea, exhibited hardy flowering
shrubs and Carnation ‘ Winter Cheer.’
lxxii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Messrs. Balchin, Hassocks, sent Boronias and Coprosmas.
From Messrs. James, Farnham Royal, came a very interesting
group of Cinerarias, the result of crossing C. cruenta with C.
lanata.
Frorat CommittEer, May 11, 1897.
W. MarsHatct, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-two members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. Mount, Canterbury, for Roses.
To Messrs. William Paul, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
Silver-gilt Banksian Medal.
To Mr. Box, Croydon, for Gloxinias.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Barr, Covent Garden, for Tulips, &c.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for herbaceous plants and
hardy shrubs.
To Mr. Walker, Thame, for ‘ Maréchal Niel’ Roses.
To Mr. Ware, Tottenham, for herbaceous and Alpine plants. «.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Kelway, Langport, for tree Ponies.
To Messrs. J. Veitch, Chelsea, for Tulips and hardy flowering
shrubs.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Young, Stevenage, for Gloxinias and Zonal
Pelargoniums.
To Messrs. Cutbush, Highgate, for herbaceous plants and
hardy shrubs. .
To Messrs. Kemp & Wilson, Mortimer Street, for bouquets,
&e.
To Messrs. Cheal, Crawley, for hardy flowering trees and
shrubs.
First Class Certificate.
To Anemia rotundifolia (votes, unanimous), from Mr. Bull,
FLORAL COMMITTEE, MAY lI. lxxiii
Chelsea. A new species from Brazil of dwarf spreading and
sraceful habit, with long fronds and roundish deep green pinne.
The barren fronds have whip-like extremities from which young
plants are produced.
Award of Merit.
To Lilac ‘Senator Holland’ (votes, 14 for, 2 against), from
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain). A free
flowering variety with semi-double flowers. The colour in the
bud state being rosy-purple, and soft lilac when fully expanded.
To Rhododendron ‘ Pink Pearl’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. John Waterer, Bagshot. Flowers of great size, borne
in huge trusses ; colour bright rosy-pink, the upper petal spotted
with red.
To Trollius napellifolius (votes, 13 for, 1 against), from
Messrs. Barr, Covent Garden. A variety with semi-double deep
golden yellow flowers.
To Streptocarpus x achimeniflora (S. ‘ Veitch’s hybrid’ ¢ 8S.
polyanthus 9) (votes, 15 for, 1 against), from Messrs. J. Veitch,
Chelsea. Long tubed flowers, borne on stout many branched
scapes, colour mauve with a light centre.
Other Exhibits.
The Director, Royal Gardens, Kew, sent a collection of sprays
of trees and shrubs, including beautiful specimens of Rhodo-
dendron Kewense, R. Sminowi, R. Luscombei, Amelanchier
alnifolia, Cytisus purgans, C. Ardoini, and Pyrus Scheideckeri.
Messrs. de Rothschild, Gunnersbury House, Acton (gr. Mr.
Hudson), staged Hymenocallis macrostephana.
From the Duke of Marlborough, Blenheim Palace, Wood-
stock (gr. Mr. Whillans), came magnificent plants of Carnation
‘ Admiration,’ under which name it received an Award of Merit
on June 9, 1896. (See Vol. xx., Part 1, page Ixxxviii.) By
permission of the Council the name was now, at the request of
the Duke, changed to ‘ Duchess Consuelo.’
Sir Weetman Pearson, Bart., M.P., Paddockhurst, Crawley
(gr. Mr. Capp), sent a group of Gloxinias, Ferns, and Zonal
Pelargoniums.
R. I. Measures, Esq., Ladymead, Rogate (gr. Mr. Wooton),
exhibited a specimen of Phyllocactus speciosus grandiflorus.
lxxiv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
From the Hon. W. F. D. Smith, M.P., Greenlands, Henley-
on-Thames (gr. Mr. Perkins), came Hippeastrum ‘ Hayne.’
K. Jackson, Esq., Theascombe House, Stroud, sent Tree
Carnation ‘ Victoria Regina.’
Mr. Henry Vagg, 65 Central Market, E.C., sent a Petunia
named Henry Vagg.
From Mr. R. Dean, Ealing, came a double white Auricula
named ‘ Diamond.’
Mr. E. H. Krelage, Haarlem, Holland, exhibited a group of
herbaceous flowers.
Mr. D. Storrie, St. Madoes Cottage, Glencarse, Perthshire,
sent Auriculas.
From Messrs. Cripps, Tunbridge Wells, came plants of
Deutzia Lemoinei.
Mr. Ladhams, Shirley, Southampton, sent hardy flowers.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, May 26, 1897.
TEMPLE GARDENS.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the chair, and twenty-three members
present.
Awards Recommended [see also p. xvii] :—
First Class Certificate.
To Davallia hirta (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Sander,
St. Albans. A very graceful fern, with large, broad, deep green
arching fronds.
Award of Merit.
To Carnation ‘ Artemus’ (votes, unanimous), from Martin R.
Smith, Esq., The Warren, Hayes (gr. Mr. Blick). Moderate
sized scarlet flowers, flaked with slate colour.
To Begonia ‘ Queen of Queens’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
Box, Croydon. A variety with large Apricot-coloured flowers.
To Begonia ‘ Diamond Jubilee’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
Box, Croydon. A double yellow variety.
To Clematis ‘Marcel Moser’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
Moser, Versailles. A variety with large rosy-lilac flowers, with a
broad band of deep purplish-lilac down the centre of each petal.
To Rhododendron fi. pl. ‘Madame Moser’ (votes, unanimous),
FLORAL COMMITTEE, MAY 26. lxxv
from Mr. Moser, Versailles. A dwarf growing variety. The
semi-double flowers are bright rosy-crimson with crisped petals.
To Phyllocactus ‘ Adonis’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
James Veitch, Chelsea. Large bright rosy-pink flowers.
To Phyllocactus ‘Syrens’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
James Veitch, Chelsea. Salmon-rose flowers, with a deeper
centre.
To Azalea rustica fl. pl. ‘Freya’ (votes, 10 for), from Messrs.
James Veitch, Chelsea. A pretty variety, with semi-double,
salmon-pink flowers. Externally the colour is rich rose.
To Azalea rustica fi. pl. ‘ Ribera’ (votes, 11 for, 3 against),
from Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea. The semi-double flowers
of this variety are white shaded with blush in the centre.
Externally the colour is rosy pink.
To Caladium ‘Mrs. McLeod’ (votes, 9 for), from Messrs,
James Veitch, Chelsea. A dwarf growing variety with moderate
sized red leaves, beautifully mottled with grey.
To Caladium ‘ Lady Stafford Northcote’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea. A very fine variety with
large heart-shaped red leaves, blotched with deep crimson.
To Pyrethrum ‘Wilson Barrett’ (votes, 8 for, 5 against),
from Messrs. Kelway, Langport. Double, bright pink flowers,
shaded with rose.
To Clematis ‘Duchess of Albany’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Jackman, Woking. The small rose-pink flowers of this
variety are borne very freely.
To Ficus radicans variegata (votes, 9 for), from Mr. Bull,
Chelsea. A pretty variegated form of climbing habit. The
small lanceolate leaves are pale green, deeply margined with
creamy white.
To Canna ‘Comte de Bouchard’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, and Messrs. Cannell, Swanley.
The deep yellow flowers are heavily spotted and splashed with
reddish brown.
To Croton ‘ Her Majesty’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Fisher, Son & Sibray, Sheffield. A very graceful variety, with
long narrow leaves, colour rich yellow and deep green.
To Iris ‘ Lupina’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Wallace,
Colchester. The broad standards are brownish red with deeper
veins ; falls greenish-yellow blotched and striped with maroon.
Ixxvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Petunia ‘Mrs. Fred Sander’ (votes, 11 for, 7 against),
from Messrs. Sander, St. Albans. A variety with large double
rosy-pink flowers with fimbriated edges.
Botanical Certificate.
To Arisema Bakeriana (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Sander, St. Albans.
Other Exhibits. [See also p. xvii.]
Mr. Cypher, Cheltenham, sent Bougainvillea Cypherii and
Anthurianum Scherzerianum ‘ Cypher’s variety.’
Messrs. Cripps, Tunbridge Wells, staged Astilbe Lemoinei
‘Gerbe d’Argent.’ The Committee asked to see this again.
From Mr. R. Dean, Ealing, came a group of Violas.
Messrs. Gregory & Evans, Sidcup, sent Calceolaria ‘ Victoria.’
Messrs. Willams, Upper Holloway, sent Hippeastrum
‘ Victoria.’
From Mr. Fred Perkins, Leamington, came a Tree Carnation
named ‘ Primrose Queen.’
Messrs. Sander, St. Albans, sent Streptocarpus ‘ Sander’s
White.’ The Committee asked to see this again.
ORCHID COMMITTEE.
JANUARY 12, 1897.
Harry J. Verrcu, Esq., in the Chair, and seventeen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Baron Schréder, The Dell, Egham (gr. Mr. H.
Ballantine), for a noble example of the finely blotched
Odontoglossum crispum Stevensii, with fifteen very large and
perfect flowers on a spike.
To Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a group of Orchids.
To F. A. Bevan, Esq., Trent Park, Barnet (gr. Mr. Lees), for
ORCHID COMMITTEE, JANUARY 12. lxxvii
a group of Odontoglossum Pescatorei, O. crispum, and Cypri-
pedium insigne.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Hugh, Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of
Orchids.
Award of Merit.
To Cattleya Loddigesii superba (votes, unanimous), from
Baron Schréder (gr. Mr. H. Ballantine). A very robust, large-
flowered form, of bright colour.
To Cypripedium x ‘ Lilian Greenwood ’ (votes, 7 for, 3 against),
from H. Greenwood, Esq., Highfield, Haslingden, Lancashire.
A C. bellatulum cross, of which the other parent was not
stated, but being very close to C. x Leysenianum it was probably
between C. bellatulum and C. barbatum Warnerii.
To Mormodes badium var. luteum (votes, unanimous), from
the Hon. Walter Rothschild, Tring Park, Tring (gr. Mr. E.
Hill). A remarkable plant, easily distinguished by its broad,
flat labellum. The type M. badium (Rolfe) has glowing crimson->
purple flowers; the variety ‘luteum’ being entirely bright
yellow.
To Cypripedium x Lebaudyanum (C. Haynaldianum x C.
philippinense) (votes, 8 for, 6 against), from Messrs. Linden,
V’Horticulture Internationale, Pare Leopold, Brussels. A
distinct hybrid in which the characters of the parents were
effectively blended.
To Lelia x Lucy Ingram (L. purpurata ¢ x L. Perrinii ¢)
(votes, unanimous); from C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead
House, Godalming (gr. Mr. T. W. Bond). A fine flower
resembling an enlarged L. Perrinii, with labellum approaching
in size and colour typical L. purpurata.
Botanical Certificate.
To Bulbophyllum Dayanum, from the, Hon. Walter
Rothschild, Tring Park, Tring (gr. Mr. E. Hill).
To Dendrobium Bancroftianum, from Messrs. F. Sander & Co.
The plant resembled a slender D. speciosum.
Cultural Commendation.
To Messrs. Linden, Brussels, for Cochlioda vuleanica
maxima.
lxxviili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Other Exhibits.
Baron Schréder sent a group of fine varieties of Odonto-
glossums, Cypripediums, &c.
Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, showed Cattleya x Miranda
(C. Triane ¢ x C. guttata Prinzii 2); and Cypripedium x
Prospero (C. insigne Sandere ¢ x C. Spicerianum ¢?), the result
being a pale C. x Leeanum.
Fred Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr. Mr. T.
Stafford), sent a yellow form of C. insigne; C. x Leeanum
Masereelianum ; Lelia anceps Dawsonii, Dendrobium x Cybele,
D. x Schneiderianum and Odontoglossum mirandum.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming, staged a
small group of hybrid Lelias and Lelio-Cattleyas.
Herr Otto Froebel, Zurich, sent Odontoglossum Ander-
sonianum var.
Reginald Young, Esq., Sefton Park, Liverpool, showed
Lycaste Skinnerii, Young’s var. (syn. L. 5S. Armeniaca).
De B. Crawshay, Esq., Rosefield, Sevenoaks (gr. Mr. S.
Cooke), showed Lelia anceps ‘Mrs. De B. Crawshay.’ A very
fine and richly coloured variety.
Messrs. Linden, Brussels, sent Cochlioda nimiata, a supposed
natural hybrid between C. Noezliana and C. vulcanica. Also
varieties of Cypripedium insigne.
John Stark, Esq., Croston Towers, Alderley Edge, Cheshire
(gr. Mr. S. Marshall), sent Cattleya Triane ‘ Bernard.’
Sir Frederick Wigan, Clare Lawn, East Sheen (gr. Mr.
W. H. Young), sent a spike of Cymbidium grandiflorum
(C. Hookerianum).
G. W. Law-Schofield, Esq., New Hall Hay, Rawtenstall,
Manchester (gr. Mr. Shill), showed a form of Cypripedium x
Charles Richman.
E. S. Clark, Esq., Wrexham, sent Cypripedium nitens and
Leelia anceps var.
Mr. A. J. Keeling, Bradford, sent a light form of Calanthe x
Veitchii.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9. lxxix
OrcHID CoMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9, 1897.
SypNEY CouRTAULD, Esq., in the Chair, and eighteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a very fine group of
Orchids.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Linden, l’Horticulture Internationale, Pare
Leopold, Brussels, for a selection of very fine varieties of Cattleya
Triane.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a group of
Orchids.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of Orchids.
Award of Merit.
To Cattleya Triane Imperator (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Linden. A very fine variety, with labellum almost
entirely of a dark purple colour.
To Cattleya Trianz eximia (votes, 11 for, 6 against), from
Messrs. Linden. A very large and well-formed flower.
To Lelia anceps Kienastiana (votes, unanimous), from Frau
Ida Brandt, Brunnenhof, Riesbach, Zurich. Flowers large,
white, tinted with rose, the front and side lobes of the lip bright
rose.
To Lelio-Cattieya x Violetta (C. Gaskelliana 9 x L. pur-
purata ¢) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Veitch & Sons. A
showy flower of the same class as L.-C. x Exoniensis, but formed
more like C. labiata.
To Phalenopsis x Hebe (P. Sanderiana ¢ x P. rosea ¢)
(votes, 7 for, 6 against), from Messrs. Veitch & Sons. The
flowers resemble a good form of P. x intermedia.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Jas. Cypher, Queen’s Road, Cheltenham, for a grand
specimen of Dendrobium x Ainsworthii, Cypher’s variety, and
for Dendrobium x splendidissimum grandiflorum, with growths
over 4 feet in length, well furnished with flowers.
1, Ha ]
F y i | AN Wy
Sill La
DDD L\\
\
\
iN
|
i
\
i
}
| |
\
Q
‘
‘
i
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Messrs. B. 8. Williams & Son, Upper Holloway, sent a fine
group of Orchids.
The Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, Highbury, Moor
Other Exhibits.
lxxx
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.
29.— DENDROBIUM x KENNETH.
Fie.
Green, Birmingham (gr. Mr. Burberry), showed Dendrobium x
Burberryanum (D. x Dominianum ¢ x D. Findlayanum ¢) and
D. x splendidissimum grandiflorum 9 x D. aureum ¢.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 9. Ixxxi
The Hon. Walter Rothschild, Tring Park, Tring (gr. Mr. E.
Hill), sent Cypripedium x Enid (C. Spicerianum g¢ x C.
bellatulum ¢ ).
Norman C. Cookson, Esq., Oakwood, Wylam, Northumberland
(gr. Mr. Wm. Murray), again showed Dendrobium x Kenneth
(D. Bensonie ¢ x D. McCarthie ¢). (Fig. 29.)
Thos. Statter, Esq., Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester (gr.
Mr. R. Johnson), sent Cypripedium x Rolfei (C. bellatulum x
C. Rothschildianum), which seemed to be rather between C.
bellatulum and some form or hybrid of C. insigne, or C. x
Leeanum. Also C. x triumphans (C. x Sallieri Hyeanum x
C. x enanthum superbum); C. x Rubens (C. bellatulum x C.
callosum) ; and C. villosum giganteum.
Elijah Ashworth, Esq., Harefield Hall, Wilmslow, Cheshire
(gr. Mr. Holbrook), showed Cattleya Triane ‘Miss Beatrice
Ashworth,’ a pretty form of the C. T. Backhousiana class.
Messrs. Heath & Son, Cheltenham, showed Dendrobium
nobile Heathii, very bright in colour.
J. Hawthorn Kitson, Esq., Elmet Hall, Leeds (gr. Mr. T.
Bonsall), again sent Odontoglossum Andersonianum Kitsoni.
Reginald Young, Esq., Sefton Park, Liverpool, sent several
hybrid Cypripediums.
W. M. Appleton, Esq., Weston-super-Mare, showed Cypripe-
dium x tesselatum, Appleton’s variety (C. concolor x C. barbatum
Warneri), C. x Quies and other varieties.
G. W. Law-Schofield, Esq., New Hall Hey, Rawtenstall, near
Manchester (gr. Mr. Shill), sent Dendrobium x Schneiderianum.
T. W. Swinburne, Esq., Corndean Hall, Winchcombe (gr
Mr. W. Rendal), sent Cypripedium Mons. de Curte, C. x Swin-
burnei magnificum, C. Boxalli, and C. villosum giganteum.
Welbore §. Ellis, Esq., Hazelbourne, Dorking, showed
Epidendrum Ellisii, Lycaste gigantea, Odontoglossum Harry-
anum, and Lelia glauca.
lxxxil PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
OrcHID CommitTTEE, Marca 9, 1897.
SyDNEY CoURTAULD, Eisq., in the Chair, and seventeen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a very fine group of
Orchids, remarkable in which were Epidendrum Endresii, and
the hybrids with it; E. x Endresio-Wallisii, and E. x elegantu-
lum; Cattleya x Miranda (C. guttata Prinzii x C. Triane),
and C. x intertexta (C. Mossie x C. Warnerii).
To C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming (gr.
Mr. T. W. Bond), for a group of well-grown specimens of Den-
drobium x splendidissimum grandiflorum.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr.
W. H. White), for a fine and interesting group of Orchids, in
which were grand examples of some of the smaller Masde-
vallias, &c.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a very good
sroup of Orchids, containing several excellent forms of Lycaste ©
Skinnerii. |
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of Den-
drobium crassinode and other Orchids. |
First Class Certificate.
To Bulbophyllum Ericssonii (Krédnzlin) (votes, unanimous),
from the Honble. Walter Rothschild, Tring Park (gr. Mr. E.
Hill). A very fine species, with large heads of yellowish flowers,
spotted with purple, and not inaptly likened by the author of the
species to Masdevallia chimera.
To Cymbidium eburneum (votes, unanimous), from the
Right Honble. Earl Brownlow, Ashridge, Gt. Berkhamstead,
Herts (gr. Mr. R. B. Lowe).
Award of Merit.
To Masdevallia x Pourbaixii (M. Veitchii x M. caudata
Shuttleworthii) (votes, unanimous), from Sir Trevor Lawrence,
Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr. W. H. White). This, although
ORCHID COMMITTEE, MARCH 9. lxxxili
of the same parentage as M. x Kimballiana, is superior to that
variety, the broad orange-red flowers being very fine.
To Cypripedium x hirsuto-Sallieri (C. hirsutissimum x C.
x Sallieri Hyeanum) (votes, unanimous), from Sir Trevor
Lawrence, Bart. A very delicately tinted flower, almost an
Albino. Flowers pale greenish white, with very faint lilac flush
on the petals.
To Odontoglossum crispum Kegeljanii (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Linden, 1l’Horticulture Internationale, Pare
Leopold, Brussels. A well-formed spotted variety. (Lindenia,
t. 565.)
To Odontoglossum crispum ‘Ami Charles’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Messrs. Linden. Good shape, petals serrate, and
with many purple spots; sepals with fewer and larger spots.
(Lindenia, t. 566.)
To Dendrobium x Ainsworthii intertextum (D. nobile, pale
var. xX D. aureum, Lee’s var.) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. Flowers large, cream-white, with
claret-purple disc to the lip.
To Lycaste Skinnerii pulcherrima (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans. A fine form with white
flowers delicately tinted with pink.
Botanical Certificate.
To Epidendrum Endresii, from Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.,
and Messrs. Veitch & Sons.
To Sarcochilus Hartmannii, from Sir Trevor Lawrence,
Bart.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. H. Ballantine, gardener to Baron Schroder, The
Dell, Staines, for two forms of the fine Calanthe x ‘ Baron
Schroder,’ with spikes over 5 ft. in length.
To Mr. W. H. White, gardener to Sir Trevor Lawrence,
Bart., Burford, Dorking, for Brasso-Cattleya x Lindleyana with
twenty-six flowers. .
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a magnificent
specimen of Platyclinis glumacea.
To Mr. Geo. Cragg, gardener to Walter C. Walker, Hsq.,
Percy Lodge, Winchmore Hill, for a fine specimen of Dendro-
bium primulinum giganteum.
R 2
lxxxlv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Other Exhibits.
The Right Honble. Joseph Chamberlain, Highbury, Moor
Green, Birmingham (gr. Mr. H. A. Burberry), sent a small collec-
tion of hybrid Dendrobiums.
Messrs. Linden, Brussels, sent Odontoglossum x Cirro-Hallii
(O. cirrhosum x O. Hallii xanthoglossum), which differed from
O. x elegans (probably O. cirrhosum x O. Hallii leucoglossum)
in the yellower tint of the flowers (see Lindenia, t. 569) ; also
O. x Wm. Stevens, near to O. x Wilckeanum.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq. (gr. Mr. T. W. Bond), showed Cattleya
x elata (C. Triane? x C. Lawrenceana ¢).
T. B. Haywood, Esq., Woodhatch, Reigate (gr. Mr. C. J.
Salter) showed Leelio-Cattleya x Haywoodii. Of unrecorded
parentage, and allied to L.-C. x Hippolyta.
F. A. Bevan, Esq., Trent Park, New Barnet (gr. Mr. Lees),
showed a fine Odontoglossum Hallii.
Mr. J. R. Hall, Foxwarren Gardens, Cobham, sent spikes of
Phaius x hybridus (P. grandifolius? x P. Wallichii ¢).
W. A. Gent, Esq., Brooklands, Cheshire, showed various
Dendrobiums.
H. Howard Vyse, Esq., Stoke Place, Slough (gr. Mr. Page),
sent Lycaste Skinnerii.
Mr. F. Perry, Spye Park Gardens, Chippenham, sent Odonto-
glossum crispum.
A. Warburton, Esq., Vine House, Haslingden, showed
Odontoglossum crispum Victoria Regina. Purple tinted and
spotted.
Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park (gr. Mr. Fred J. Thorne),
sent a good Dendrobium atro-violaceum.
S. G. Lutwyche, Esq., showed hybrid Dendrobiums.
OrcHID ComMITTEE, Marcu 23, 1897.
SypNEY CouRTAULD, Hsq., in the Chair, and eighteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal. !
To Norman C. Cookson, Esq., Oakwood, Wylam, Northum-
ORCHID COMMITTEE, MARCH 23. lxxxv
berland (gr. Mr. Wm. Murray), for a magnificent plant of Phaius
x Cooksonii, with eighteen spikes of flowers.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Baron Schréder, The Dell, Egham (gr. Mr. H. Ballantine),
for a group of rare Odontoglossums, &c.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr.
W. H. White), for an interesting group of rare Orchids; all
remarkably well grown and profusely flowered.
To Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for an extensive group of
Orchids.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Linden, 1’Horticulture Internationale, Pare
Leopold, Brussels, for a group of hybrid Odontoglossums.
To De B. Crawshay, Esq., Rosefield, Sevenoaks (gr. Mr. 8.
Cooke), for a collection of Odontoglossums.
To Welbore 8. Ellis, Esq., Hazelbourne, Dorking (gr. Mr.
Barrell), for Odontoglossum crispum, O. Pescatorei, &c., remark-
ably well grown.
To J. Bradshaw, Esq., The Grange, Southgate (gr. Mr.
Whiffen), for a group of Dendrobiums, &c.
To Thos. Gabriel, Esq., Streatham (gr. Mr. Guyett), for a
group in which were some very fine plants of Dendrobium
Wardianum.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a group of
Orchids.
First Class Certificate.
To Odontoglossum crispum Luciani (votes, 13 for, 0 against),
from Messrs. Linden, Brussels. A finely-formed flower, heavily
blotched with purplish brown.
Award of Merit.
To Odontoglossum crispum ocellatum (votes, unanimous),
from W. Thompson, Esq., Walton Grange, Stone, Staffordshire
(gr. Mr. W. Stevens). A very finely spotted variety, with the
flowers suffused with bright rose colour.
To Dendrobium nobile, Hutchinson’s variety (votes, unani-
mous), from Major-Gen. Hutchinson, Owthorpe, Bournemouth
(gr. Mr. Barnes). Three plants were shown of a similar strain,
with large broad-petalled flowers of distinct character. Imported
from China.
lxxxvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. pe
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. W. H. White, gr. to Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.,
Burford, Dorking, for a fine plant of Lelia rubescens, with eight
spikes of flowers.
Botanical Certificate.
To Angrecum Ellisii from Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr.
Mr. W. H. White).
To Epidendrum varicosum from Welbore 8. Ellis, Esgq.,
Dorking (gr. Mr. Barrell).
Other Exhibits.
Frau Ida Brandt, Brunnenhof, Riesbach, Zurich (gr. Mr.
Schlecht), sent an interesting collection of cut spikes of Phale-
nopsis and other Orchids.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., sent a number of varieties of
Epidendrum obtained between F. xanthinum and E. radicans.
Messrs. Veitch & Sons showed the extraordinary Epicattleya
x matutina (Cattleya Bowringiana ¢ x Epidendrum radicans ¢).
The growth of the plant much resembled E. radicans, even to
having aerial roots on the stems, notwithstanding the fact that
the seeds were from C. Bowringiana, which is totally different
in growth. The flowers were about 2 inches across, yellow,
tinged with vermilion; the labellums varying much in form
from ovate, irregularly notched, to trilobate, as though the
character were not fixed.
Walter Cobb, Esq., Dulcote, Tunbridge Wells (gr. Mr. J.
Howes), showed Platyclinis glumacea, var. valida; and a
pretty—nearly white—Cattleya Triane.
W. Wheatley Ball, Esq., Rockhills, Borncliffe, Sheffield, sent
Dendrobium crassinode.
Malcolm §. Cooke, Esq., Kingston Hill (gr. Mr. Buckell)
showed a good Odontoglossum nebulosum.
W. Thompson, Esq., sent a home-raised Odontoglossum x
excellens.
Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, showed Cypripedium x
Prewettii.
A. H. Smee, Esq., The Grange, Wallington (gr. Mr.
Cummins), showed a flower of Sobralia Ruckerii.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, APRIL 13. Ilxxxvil
OrcHID ComMITTEE, Aprit 13, 1897.
Harry J. Vertou, Esq., in the Chair, and seventeen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park, Sunningdale (gr. Mr.
Fred J. Thorne), for a group of Diacrium (Epidendrum) bico-
matum, splendidly grown, and well furnished with strong spikes
of white flowers.
To J. Bradshaw, Esq., The Grange, Southgate (gr. Mr.
Whiffen), for a group of Cymbidiums, Dendrobium
Jamesianum, &c.
To Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a splendid group
of rare Orchids.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To F. W. Marter, Esq., Lake House, Byfleet (gr. Mr. Bradley),
for a noble specimen of Ansellia africana, with nine spikes,
bearing in the aggregate 800 flowers.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr. W.
H. White), for an excellent group of well-cultivated Orchids.
To the Marquis Camden, Bayham Abbey, Lamberhurst (gr.
Mr. A. Methven), fora group of Dendrobium nobile, D. War-
dianum, &c.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of
Orchids.
To De B. Crawshay, Esq., Rosefield, Sevenoaks (gr. Mr. S.
Cooke), for a collection of Odontoglossums.
To C. J. Lucas, Esq., Warnham Court, Horsham (gr. Mr.
Duncan), for varieties of Odontoglossum Andersonianum, &c.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a group of
Orchids.
First Class Certificate.
To Odontoglossum x Wilckianum, var. ‘Queen-Empress’
(votes, unanimous), from Baron Schréder, The Dell, Egham (er.
Mr. H. Ballantine). A very large and showily marked flower of
the colours of O. triumphans.
To Lelio-Cattleya x Digbyano-Triane (C. Triane 2 x L.
Ixxxvili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Digbyana ¢) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Veitch & Sons.
In general appearance this resembled the previously certificated
L.-C. x Digbyano-Mossie, but was of a much deeper colour.
To Gygopetalum x Perrenoudii superbum (Z. intermedium 9
x Z. maxillare Gautieri¢) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Veitch & Sons. An improvement on the original, which was
exhibited previously by M. Peeters, of Brussels.
Award of Merit.
To Odontoglossum Pescatorei Sligachan variety (votes,
unanimous), from J. Wilson Potter, Esq., Sligachan, Croydon. A
very large and finely shaped flower; white, with a rose tint on
some parts of the segments.
To Odontoglossum x Andersonianum, Danehurst variety
(votes, unanimous), from Sydney Jackson, Esq., Danehurst,
Epsom (gr. Mr. E. Short). Flowers large, bright yellow, with
red-brown markings.
To Dendrobium albo-sanguineum (votes, 11 for), from R. I.
Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge, Camberwell (gr. Mr. H. J.
Chapman).
Botanical Certificate.
To Celogyne elata, from Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr.
W. H. White).
To Ansellia africana, from F. W. Marter, Esq., Byfleet (gr.
Mr. Bradiey).
To Maxillaria Houtteana, from Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.
(gr. W. H. White).
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. W. H. White, gardener to Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.,
for Cymbidium Devonianum, for Maxillaria grandiflora, and for
Miltonia cuneata.
To E. J. Johnson, Esq., Rongham Hall, Bury St. Edmunds,
for Cattleya Schrédere.
Other Exhibits.
W.C. Walker, Esq., Percy Lodge, Winchmore Hill (gr. Mr.
Geo. Cragg), sent a stand of Cattleya citrina, and C.
Schrédere.
Messrs. B. 8. Williams & Son, Upper Holloway, sent a group
of Orchids.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, APRIL 27. lxxxix
Baron Schréder, The Dell, Kgham (gr. Mr. H. Ballantine),
showed Odontoglossum x Dellense (O. Pescatorei x O.
prenitens), which certainly seemed to bear evidence of its
parentage, and is totally different from O. x excellens.
C. J. Crosfield, Esq., Liverpool (gr. Mr. Barkley), sent good
specimens of Dendrobium Wardianum and Odontoglossum
crispum.
Frau Ida Brandt, Riesbach, Zurich (gr. Mr. Schlecht), sent
Epidendrum falcatum, and other Orchids.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming (gr. Mr.
T. W. Bond), showed Lelio-Cattleya x ‘Sir Wm. Ingram’; and
Cattleya x Wm. Murray.
Fred Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr. Mr. T.
Stafford), sent Dendrobium x ‘Clio.’
Captain Holford, Westonbirt, Tetbury (gr. Mr. Chapman),
showed a good Lycaste Skinnerii.
R. I. Measures, Esq., Camberwell (gr. Mr. H. J. Chapman),
sent Cypripedium x Greyanum, C. x Lachmee, and C.x Quies.
OrcHID CommiITTEE, APRIL 27, 1897.
Harry J. Vertou, Ksq., in the Chair, and sixteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Welbore S. Ellis, Esq., Hazelbourne, Dorking (gr. Mr.
Barrell), for a group of Odontoglossums.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To R. Brooman- White, Esq., Arddarroch, Garelochead, N.B.,
for a group of Odontoglossums and Cattleya x Lawre-Mossie.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a group of
Orchids.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of
Cattleyas, Odontoglossums, &c.
To Messrs. B. S. Williams & Son, Upper Holloway, for a
group of Orchids.
xe PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Malcolm 8. Cook, Esq., Kingston Hill (gr. Mr. Buckell),
for a group of Orchids.
First Class Certificate.
To Odontoglossum crispum heliotropium (votes, 8 for), from
R. Brooman- White, Esq., Arddarroch, Garelochead,N.B. A fine
variety with light rose-pink flowers, blotched with red-brown on
the sepals and petals.
Award of Merit.
To Odontoglossum x excellens Lowi (votes, 8 for, 5 against)
from Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton. A good variety with
bright yellow flowers blotched with brown.
Cultural Commendation.
To the Marquis Camden, Bayham Abbey, Kent (gr. Mr.
Methven), for a fine specimen of Dendrobium thyrsiflorum, with
twenty-seven flower spikes.
To Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park, Sunningdale, Berks (gr.
Mr. Fred. J. Thorne), for a fine specimen of Luddemannia
Lehmannii, with a pendulous raceme over 2 feet in length, and
bearing seventy-four bright orange-coloured flowers.
To Wm. White Palmer, Esq., Rutland Lodge, Shortlands,
Kent, for afinely-flowered specimen of Dendrobium infundibulum.
Other Exhibits.
H. T. Pitt, Esq., Rosslyn, Stamford Hill (gr. Mr. Aldous),
showed a fine form of Odontoglossum Hallii leucoglossum.
IF. W. Marter, Esq., Lake House, Byfleet (gr. Mr. P. Bradley),
showed Lelia purpurata with five and seven flowers respectively
on two spikes.
K. J. Sidebotham, Esq., Bowdon, Cheshire, showed Dendro-
bium nobile roseum.
Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park (gr. Mr. Fred. J. Thorne),
showed Eriopsis rutidobulbon.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, MAY 11. XC
OrcHID CommiTTEr, May 11, 1897.
Harry J. Vertcu, Esq., in the Chair, and thirteen
members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a very fine group of
Orchids.
Silver Flora Medal.
To A. H. Smee, Esq., The Grange, Wallington (gr. Mr.
Cummins), for a group of fine varieties of Cattleya Mendelii, &c.
To Walter C. Walker, Esq., Percy Lodge, Winchmore Hill
(gr. Mr. Geo. Cragg), for a good group of Orchids.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of
Cattleyas, Odontoglossums, &e.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. B. §. Williams & Son, Upper Holloway, for a
group of Orchids.
To Messrs. Cripps & Son, Tunbridge Wells, for fine specimens
of Cypripedium caudatum and C. caudatum Wallisii.
Award of Merit.
To Cypripedium x Chapmanii magnificum (C. bellatulum x
C. Curtisii) (votes, unanimous), from R. I. Measures, Hsq.,
Rogate, Sussex (gr. Mr. Wooton). A fine dark flower of the
C. x‘ Chas. Richman’ class.
To Cypripedium x bellatulo-vexillarium (votes, 9 for, 2
against), from Mrs. Briggs Bury, Bank House, Accrington. A
pretty variety near to C. x Leysenianum and C. x ‘Lilian
Greenwood.’
To Odontoglossum Andersonianum Bogaerdianum (votes,
unanimous), from De B. Crawshay, Esq., Rosefield, Sevenoaks
(gr. Mr. S. Cooke).- A very large variety, of good shape, heavily
blotched.
To Leelio-Cattleya x ‘ Hippolyta,’ Dulcote var. (votes, 6 for,
5 against), from Walter Cobb, Esq., Dulcote, Tunbridge Wells
(gr. Mr. J. Howes). Flowers larger and of a darker orange-red
than the ordinary form.
X¢li PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Botamical Certificate.
To Cirrhopetalum elegantulum, from A. H. Smee, Esq., The
Grange, Wallington (gr. Mr. Cummins).
To Oncidium Warneri, from Frau Ida Brandt, Brunnenhof,
Riesbach, Zurich (gr. Mr. Schlecht).
Other Exhibits. ,
Sir Frederick Wigan, Clare Lawn, East Sheen (gr. Mr. W. H.
Young), sent Lelia purpurata ‘Ethel Grey.’ A large white
variety with claret-red front to the lip.
The Marquis Camden, Bayham Abbey, Kent (gr. Mr. Methven),
showed Cattleya Mendelii with seven flowers on a spike.
J. Forster Alcock, Esq., Northchurch, showed Cyrtopodium
virescens and Lelia Schilleriana.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead, Godalming (gr. Mr. T. W.
Bond), showed Cattleya x ‘ Rajah’ (C. Trianz x C. Warscewiczii)
and Lelio-Cattleya x Sir Wm. Ingram.
Malcolm 8. Cooke, Esq., Kingston Hill (gr. Mr. Buckell),
showed a fine Masdevallia Harryana.
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, sent Cypripedium x
‘Oakes Ames’ (C. Rothschildianum x C. ciliolare), resembling C.
x Massaianum.
Thos. Statter, Esq., Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester (gr.
Mr. R. Johnson), showed Lelia purpurata alba magnifica.
H. J. Harris, Esq., Chippenham (gr. Mr. W. J. Penton), sent
Odontoglossum Pescatorei.
Ki. Bostock, Ksq., Tixdale Lodge, Staffordshire, showed ten
varieties of Lelia purpurata and three of Cattleya Schrédere.
R. Brooman-White, Esq., Arddarroch, Garelochead, sent
Odontoglossum Andersonianum pulcherrimum and other
Odontoglossums.
TEMPLE SHOW.
Orcuip CommiTTEE, May 26, 1897.
Harry J. Verrcu, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-one members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
First Class Certificate.
To Odontoglossum crispum ‘ Starlight’ (votes, unanimous),
ORCHID COMMITTEE, MAY 26, x¢elil
from R. Brooman-White, Esq., Arddarroch, Garelochead, N.B.
A remarkably distinct variety with white flowers, tinted with
pink, fimbriated petals, and numerous brown spots on the inner
halves of the segments. (Fig. 30.)
vi
sang
a
\ \ tt I
\ via,
by
Wi igrt!
MMe ph,
Y \
Ulf
Yip
WY
4
Fic. 30.—OponrocLossum crispum ‘Sraruicut.’ (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
To Cypripedium x Chapmanii magnificum (C. bellatulum 2 x
C. Curtisii¢) (votes, unanimous), from R. I. Measures, Ksq.,
Rogate, Sussex (gr. Mr. Wooton). This fine hybrid received
XGIV PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
an Award of Merit on May 11, and had since then greatly
improved. (Fig. 31.)
To Leelio-Cattleya x ‘\Lady Wigan’ (L. purpurata Russelliana x
C. Mossize aurea) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Charlesworth
& Co., Heaton, Bradford. A fine flower with blush-white sepals
and petals, and finely displayed lip, of a clear pinkish white
Fic. 31.—Cyprirepium x CHAPMANII MAGNIFICUM. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
with some purple lines in the centre, and clear yellow in the
tube.
To Lelia purpurata Ashworthiana (votes, unanimous), from
Elijah Ashworth, Esq., Harefield Hall, Wilmslow, Cheshire
(gr. Mr. Holbrook). The peculiarity of this variety is that the
petals partake of the colouring of the lip, and are much broader
than usual. It isa remote instance of ‘ trilabellia.’
ORCHID COMMITTEE, MAY 26. XCV
To Odontoglossum luteo-purpureum sceptrum aureum (votes,
unanimous), from W. Thompson, Eisq., Walton Grange, Stone,
Staffordshire (gr. Mr. W. Stevens). A singular variety in which
the brown colouring of the type is suppressed, the flowers
having two shades of yellow.
To Lelio-Cattleya x Tyntesfieldense (votes, 13 for), from
F. Hardy, Esq. This fine hybrid, evidently a cross of Cattleya
Dowiana, had a flower equal in size to those of C. labiata.
Sepals and petals cream-white tinged with rose. Lip resembling
C. Dowiana in colour, crimped at the edge, dark velvety red,
deepening to maroon in the centre, the base bearing a marbling
of orange colour.
To Odontoglossum crispum ‘Queen Victoria’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton. Flowers large
and well formed, the segments heavily blotched with brown.
To Lelia Schilleriana, Hardy’s var. (votes, unanimous),
from Fred Hardy, Hsq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr.
Mr. T. Stafford). A very large and brightly coloured variety.
Award of Merit.
To Spathoglottis x aureo-Veillardii (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Veitch & Son, Chelsea. Flowers about one inch in
diameter, yellow with purple markings on the petals and lip.
To Odontoglossum x excellens ‘Richard Ashworth’ (votes,
8 for, 8 against), from R. Ashworth, Esq., Ashlands, Newchurch,
Manchester. A large form with cream-white flowers spotted
with brown.
To Anectochilus Sanderianus (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans. Foliage emerald green
with golden reticulation and olive-green marbling.
To Odontoglossum crispum ‘Annie’ (votes, unanimous),
from W. Thompson, Eisq., Walton Grange, Stone, Staffordshire
(gr. Mr. W. Stevens). A finely blotched variety.
To Lelia purpurata fastuosa (votes, unanimous), from A.
Warburton, Esq., Vine House, Haslingden. A very finely
coloured variety with unusually broad petals veined with bright
purple.
To Cattleya Mendelii ‘Madonna’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. W. L. Lewis & Co., Southgate. Flowers blush white
with only a slight purple colouring on the lip.
Xevl PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Odontoglossum Pescatorei imperiale (votes, unanimous), ~
from Messrs. Linden, l’Horticulture Internationale, Pare Leopold,
Brussels. Flowers large, heavily blotched with purple.
To Cattleya Mossiz ‘ Empress Queen ’ (votes, 9 for, 7 against),
from Messrs. Linden, l’Horticulture Internationale, Pare Leopold,
Brussels. A large and handsome form.
To Odontoglossum crispum Peetersii (votes, unanimous),
from Mr. A. Peeters, St. Gilles, Brussels. A fine blotched
variety.
To Cologyne Dayana, The Dell var. (votes, unanimous), from
Baron Schréder, The Dell, Egham (gr. Mr. Ballantine). Lip
larger and darker than in the ordinary form.
To Cypripedium x Conco-bellatulum (votes, unanimous), from
Thos. Statter, Esq., Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester. A
distinct and finely marked hybrid.
To Odontoglossum x excellens Thompsoni (votes, unanimous),
from W. Thompson, Esq., Walton Grange, Stone, Staffordshire
(gr. Mr. W. Stevens). Flowers bright yellow blotched with red-
brown.
Botameal Certificate.
To Dendrobium sanguineum, from Messrs. Hugh Low & Co.
(votes, unanimous). An extraordinary slender species from
Borneo. The plant shown bore a single blood-red flower, the
equal sepals and petals making it resemble a flower of Ixia
crateroides, the narrow cramped lip being inconspicuous.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Ballantine (gardener to Baron Schroder), for Coelogyne
Dayana, with twenty-four spikes.
NARCISSUS COMMITTEE, MARCH 23. xevill
NARCISSUS COMMITTEE.
Marcu 28, 1897.
The Rev. C. WotuEy-Dop in the Chair, and eighteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
First Class Certoficate.
To Narcissus ‘ Ellen Willmott’ (votes, unanimous), from the
Rev. G. H. Engleheart, Appleshaw, Andover. (Fig. 32.)
Y
: _—SS=—_
!
)
i
FN
Mi
|
L
Ua
—eA
Y,
Fig. 32.— Narcissus ‘ Exnen Wiuumorr.’ (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Ss
XGViii § PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Narcissus ‘ Southern Star’ (votes, unanimous), from the
Rev. G. H. Engleheart. (Fig. 33.)
Fic. 33.—Narcissus ‘SouTHEeRN Svar.’ (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Award of Merit.
To Narcissus ‘ Lettice Harmer ’ (votes, unanimous).
The Rey. W. Wilks showed a hybrid between N. cyclamineus
and N. Ajax.
NARCISSUS COMMITTEE, APRIL 138. XClx
Narcissus ComMITTEE, APRit 13, 1897.
The Rev. S. E. Bourne in the Chair, and five members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To the Rev. G. H. Engleheart, for a group of Narcissi.
To Messrs. Barr & Son, for a group of Narcissi.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for a group of Narcissi.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To J. T. Bennett-Poé, Esq., Holmewood, Cheshunt, for a
eroup of Narcissi.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a group of
Narcissi.
First Class Certificate.
To Narcissus ‘Snowdrop’ (votes, unanimous), from the Rev,
G. H. Engleheart.
To Narcissus ‘ Beacon’ (votes, unanimous), from the Rev.
G. H. Engleheart. |
Award of Merit.
To Narcissus ‘ Madame de Graaff’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. T. 8. Ware, Tottenham.
To Narcissus ‘ Beauty’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Barr & Son, Covent Garden.
Prizes.
Class 3.—Twenty-four varieties of Narcissus, distinct, five
blooms of each. Polyanthus excluded. Amateurs: First prize,
£1. 10s., to Miss Mellish, Worksop.
Class 4.— Seedling Narcissus, not yet in commerce, and not
having yet received a prize at any R.H.S. Show. Polyanthus
excluded. Open: First prize, 10s., to the Rev. G. H. Engleheart,
for Narcissus ‘ Red Prince.’
Cc PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Narcissus CoMMITTEE, APRIL 27, 1897.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To the Rev. G. H. Engleheart, Appleshaw, Andover, for a
group of Narcissi.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a group of
Narcissi.
To Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden, for a group of
Narcissi.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To J. W. Wilson, Esq., Drewton Stray, Yorkshire, for a
group of Narcissi.
First Class Certificate.
To Narcissus ‘ Naiad’ (N. poeticus 2 x N. triandrus ¢) (votes,
unanimous), from the Rey. G. H. Engleheart.
Award of Merit.
To Narcissus biflorus ‘ Dr. Laumonier ’ (votes, unanimous),
from the Rev. W. Wilks.
To N. bicolor ‘ Victoria,’ from Messrs. Barr & Son.
To N. b. ‘ Fred Moore,’ from Messrs. Barr & Son.
Prize.
Class 4.—Seedling Narcissus (as on April 13). First prize,
10s., to the Rev. G. H. Engleheart, for Narcissus ‘ Luna.’
EXTRACTS FROM THE PROCKEDINGS
OF THE
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
GENERAL MEETING.
JUNE 15, 1897.
Rev. G. Henstow, M.A., in the Chair.
Fellows elected (62).—Mrs. Anstruther-Thomson, Charles B.
Balfour, E. C. Batho, W. J. Batho, Mrs. Theodore Bell, Rev.
H. E. Bishop, Miss Borthwick, Hon. J. Boscawen, W. Parkinson
Bothamley, M.R.C.S., Dr. Bott, Miss Breton, Miss Burlison,
Lindsay Bury, W. H. B. Catford, W. J. Chrystal, Slade H. Clark,
H. A. Clifton, F. F. Coleman, Col. Sir H. Collett, Cornelius
Cooper, George C. Croft, M. M. Dallemagne, Archibald Day,
F. E. Etheridge, John W. Finlinson, David Fleming, Walter
Goodliffe, M.A., Sir William Vernon Harcourt, Q.C., M.P.,
L. V. Harcourt, E. Hawkins, Mrs. M. Hodgkins, Mr. Hoffman,
Rev. F. D. Horner, M.A., Samuel F. Hurnard, J.P., Robert
M. C. James, Lionel Kentish-Rankin, M.A., F.R.G.S., Miss
Laurence, Miss Mabel Lee, W. G. Marshall, Mrs. T. B. Morrish,
Arthur P. Nix, Mrs. Parker, W. H. Patterson, J. Prall, Jun.,
Arthur E. Preston, Pandeli Ralli, Frank Roy (Canada), F. G.
Sargood, Charles D. Snell, Mrs. Solly, Lady Alice Stanley, John
Morris Stone, M.A., Burnett Tabrum, J.P., Harry T. Tatham,
Mrs. EK. Meux Tayler, Rev. S. N. Tebbs, B.D., HE. P. Youell,
James D. Walker, Q.C., Mrs. Walter, Henry Whitehead, John
Gillham Womack, Miss Wyburn.
‘A lecture on ‘‘ The Physiology of Pitcher-Plants ’’ was given
by Prof. 8. H. Vines, F.R.S. (See p. 92.)
M
cli PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
GENERAL MEETING.
JUNE 29, 1897.
Mr. AuEex. Dean in the Chair. .
Fellows elected (13).—Mrs. Austin, 8. Beaumont, 8S. P.
Chatterjee (India), William Greet, Hon. Dr. Radha Halder
(India), Sholto Henry Hare, Mrs. W. Haynes, Francis E.
Hollond, Mrs. J. H. Hood, H. G. Katte, C. Leeson, W. B.
Puckle, Lady Wolverton.
A lecture on the “ Storing and Preserving of Fruit” was
given by Mr. Jos. Cheal. (See p. 112.)
GENERAL MEETING.
JuLY 18, 1897.
Mr. C. E. SHea in the Chair.
Fellows elected (11).—Dr. J. F. Beattie, Surg. Lieut.-Col.
Doig, H. E. Goldfinch, Mrs. Hoskyns, Sidney Charles Lamb
(America), Walter Latham, Beaufoi Moore, John Thomas Moore,
G. Ogston, F.C.S., Earl of Sandwich, Miss E. W. Wilde.
A lecture on ‘“‘ Mutual Accommodation between Plant
Organs’’ was given by the Rev. George Henslow, M.A. (See
p. 153.)
GENERAL MEETING.
JuLY 27, 1897.
Dr. E. Bonavia in the Chair.
Fellows elected (6).—James Bryson, Mrs. G. Carmody, John
Evans, Ernest Horsley, Joseph Kent, Com. E. Paget, R.N.
A paper was read on “ Familiar Garden Insects’’ by Mr.
W. Drury. (See p. 173.) |
GENERAL MEETING.
Avaust 10, 1897.
Mr. JonHn T. BENNETT-Po# in the Chair.
Fellows elected (10).—David Bell, Mrs. W. Black, E. T.
Cook, Mrs. Franklin Smith, Sir Edward Grey, Bart., Joseph
GENERAL MEETINGS. cill
Hiineberg (Natal), J. G. Leask, Julius Matton, E. G. E. Scriven,
Mrs. J. Seymour Trower.
A lecture on the ‘“ Cross-Fertilisation of Florists’ Flowers ”’
was given by Mr. James Douglas. (See p. 205.)
GENERAL MEETING.
Avueust 24, 1897.
Mr. GEorGE Bunyarp in the Chair.
Fellows elected (9).—Charles Butters, John Thomas Butters,
Hon. Mrs. Corbet, Mrs. M. L. Denuelle, Chas. G. Emery, Col.
Lloyd Howard, Lord Kenyon, F. G. Buller Swete, Charles S. C.
Watkins.
A lecture on “ Plums’
(See p. 213.)
?
was given by Mr. A. H. Pearson.
GENERAL MEETING.
SEPTEMBER 7, 1897.
Mr. J. T. Bennett-Po# in the Chair.
Fellows elected (10).—William Abercrombie, George F.
Bennett, Lady Cromer, Edward Edwards, John Wynne Ffoulkes,
Mrs. R. D. Garnons Williams, Mrs. M. Polloch Glen, Mrs.
Arthur Heywood, W. Horne, Alfred Smith.
A lecture on ‘‘ Nepenthes (Pitcher Plants)’ was given by
Mr. H. J. Veitch, F.L.8. (See p. 226.)
GENERAL MEETING.
SEPTEMBER 21, 1897.
Mr. JAMES DouG.tas in the Chair.
Fellows elected (16).—George Ballard, Rev. E. Bernard,
A. K. Bulley, C. S. Burns, Charles Colman, EH. W. Craigie,
Henry Dickman, M.B., Mrs. T. A. Greene, James Macdonald,
Richard Pinches, John Pitts, K. Rouquette, F. G. Treseder,
R. W. Treseder, Mrs. Way, Charles Whiting.
Society Affiliated (1).—Swansea and District Horticultural
Society.
A lecture on “ Cultivation of Cyclamen’ was given by Mr.
W. Iggulden. (See p. 263.)
uw’ 2
Civ PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
DEPUTATION TO SHREWSBURY.
Auaust 18, 1897.
A Deputation consisting of ten Fellows of the Society was
appointed by the Council at the invitation of the Executive of
the Shropshire Horticultural Society to visit the Great Com-
memoration Show at Shrewsbury.
The Deputation consisted of
Sir Trevor LAwRENCE, Bart., President R.H.S.
Puiuip Crow ey, Ksq., F.L.S., F.Z.S., &c., Treasurer R.H.S.
SYDNEY CouRTAULD, Esq., Member of Council.
THomas Statter, Esq., Member of Council.
Harry J. Vertou, Esq., F.L.S., Member of Council.
Mr. JAMES Douauas, Member of Council.
H. Senr Leonarp, Ksq., of Guildford.
Mr. W. Crump, V.M.H., of Madresfield.
Mr. JAMES SmitH, V.M.H., of Mentmore.
Rev. W. Wiuks, M.A., Secretary R.H.S.
The Deputation reached Shrewsbury on Tuesday afternoon,
August 17, about six o’clock, and were courteously received at
the railway station by Mr. Naunton and other members of the
Committee, and were shown some of the old buildings for which
Shrewsbury is famous, and also the magnificent statue which
the Shropshire Horticultural Society had recently erected to the
memory of Charles Darwin.
At8p.m.the Deputation, who were most comfortably provided
for at the Raven Hotel, were entertained at Dinner by his Wor-
ship Lieut.-Colonel Peele, Mayor of Shrewsbury.
At 9.45 on Wednesday morning the Deputation assembled on
the show ground, which belongs to the Shropshire Horticultural
Society, and is one of the prettiest possible spots for a flower
show, abounding as it does in magnificent trees, bordered by a
fine river and containing a charming piece of ornamental water.
After the Deputation had finished their work of inspection
and Awards, they were (together with the judges of the show)
entertained at luncheon at 1.80, under the Presidency of the
Right Hon. Lord Kenyon, who was supported by the Bishop of
Shrewsbury, Sir Lovelace Stamer, Bart., the Very Rev. the Dean
. DEPUTATION TO SHREWSBURY. CV
of Rochester, his Worship the Mayor of Shrewsbury, and other
local magnates. Lord Kenyon proposed a toast of Prosperity
G. 64.—OponToGLossuM oRIsPUM ‘QuEEN VicToRIA,’ see p. xcy. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
to the Royal Horticultural Society, which was responded to by
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.
Some of the Deputation stayed in Shrewsbury till Thursday,
others left after the luncheon by the 4.40 train to London.
evi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Awards at Shrewsbury.
Gold Medal.
To Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for the exhibit
best representing the progress of Horticulture during the sixty
years of Her Majesty’s reign.
Silver Gilt Knightian Medal.
To the Hon. Mrs. Ingram, Temple Newsome, Leeds (gr. Mr.
R. Dawes), for sixty dishes of Fruit.
To Sir Joseph Pease, Bart., Hutton Hall (gr. Mr. McIndoe)
for Fruit.
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Cypher, Cheltenham, for twenty specimen plants.
To Mr. C.J. Mee, Nottingham, fora group of plants arranged
for effect.
To Messrs. Cypher, Cheltenham, for a group of plants
arranged for effect.
To Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Gunnersbury House (gr. Mr.
Hudson) for twenty-two varieties of Water Lilies.
To Messrs. Dicksons, Chester, for a group of hardy plants.
Silver Knightian Medal.
To the Earl of Harrington, Elvaston Castle (gr. Mr.
Goodacre) for a deeorative dessert table.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. B. R. Davis, Yeovil, for a group of Begonias.
To Messrs. Harkness, Bedale, for a group of hardy bulbous
and tuberous plants.
To Mr. Edwin Murrell, Shrewsbury, for a group of Roses and
Gladioli. |
To Messrs. Perkins, Coventry, for Floral arrangements,
Bouquets, Buttonholes, and Sprays.
To Messrs. Ker & Sons, Aigburth, Grassendale, Liverpool,
for a group of Crotons.
To Messrs. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for a group of Begonias.
To Messrs. Smith, Worcester, for a group of Begonias.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Mr. Myers, Sutton Lane, Shrewsbury, for Zonal Pelar-
goniums.
DEPUTATION TO SHREWSB URY. evil
To Mr. Campbell, Blantyre, N.B., for a group of Carnations.
To C. E. Newton, Esq., Mickleover Manor, Derby (gr. Mr.
J. Campbell), for very fine bunches of Canon Hall Muscat
Grapes.
f
}
‘
¥
é
“ f
: \\\ \
WN jij) Z \ AS A |
SK S j YAS Z MY SN SN WAY \ \ 7
3 4, yj A . Y . We
=s A Yi AS \ °
"% WY . RAY \ RA
== y 4 a - \ QV \ \ \ '
/ FA \ \
” 5
;
|
f
‘
f
{
o
‘
*
Fic. 65.—Cattieya Mossim ‘ EMPRESS QUEEN,’ see p. xcvi. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
-
ee
CVili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Messrs. Dobbie, Rothesay, for a group of Dahlias.
To Messrs. Backhouse, York, for a small group of Alpines.
To Messrs. Cowan, Liverpool, for a group of Tea Roses.
To Mr. A. Myers, Sutton Lane, Shrewsbury, for Fuchsias.
To Mr. Thos. Pritchard, Donnington Wood, Shrewsbury, for
a Cottager’s collection of Vegetables.
To Mr. 8. Poole, Springfield, Ludlow, for a Cone s col-
lection of Potatoes.
To Morgan Williams, Esq., Aberpergwm Glyn, Neath,
Glamorgan (gr. Mr. Charles Foster), for a collection of
Vegetables.
To the Earl of Carnarvon, Highclere Castle, Newbury (gr.
Mr. W. Pope), for a collection of Vegetables.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Miss Talbot, Penrice Castle, Swansea (gr. Mr. Richard
Milner), for a collection of Vegetables.
To Mr. Thos. Birch, Grimpo, West Felton, for Cottager’s
Vegetables.
Award of Merit.
To Dracena ‘Princess Charles of Denmark’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. Leaves
dark bronzy olive green, with a well-defined carmine-red margin,
the younger leaves with a pale yellow band inside the carmine
margin. Dwarf habit.
To Caladium ‘Silver Queen’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. Leaves of medium size, silvery-
white, mottled with pale green, and with a small carmine spot at
the base of the sinus, the veins and margin light green.
To Begonia ‘Jubilee Queen’ (yotes, unanimous), from
Messrs. T. S. Ware, Tottenham. A fine double white, with
fimbriated edges.
To Begonia ‘ Samuel Pope’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Ware. A double flesh-coloured flower, with a rose edge, beauti-
fully crimped.
To Begonia ‘ Golden Queen of England’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Ware. A very bright, deep-yellow double flower.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. §. Bramwell, gardener to H. H. F. Hayhurst, Esq.,
.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, JUNE 15. Clix
Overley, Wellington, for a magnificent plant of Rhododendron
‘Princess of Wales’ covered with blooms.
To Mr. J. Carter, gardener to W. J. Scott, Esq., Besford
House, Shrewsbury, for very finely grown and coloured Coleus.
To Mr. A. Myers, Sutton Lane, Shrewsbury, for very finely
grown and coloured Coleus.
To Messrs. Harkness, Bedale, for beautifully grown Gladiolus.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE.
JUNE 15, 1897.
Dr. M. T. Masters in the Chair, and four members present.
New Method of Grafting.—Dr. Masters called attention to
the fact that the method described at the last meeting had been
adopted before by A. Knight; but on turning to that author’s
paper (Zrans. Hort. Soc., Vol. I. p. 289), it is not quite clear
whether it is quite the same. According to Knight’s figures,
the extra “‘ tongue’’ is not inserted as a duplicate scion, but
nailed to the outside of the bark; but in the text it would
read as if both tongues grew and covered the stock.
Synanthic Foxgloves—Specimens were sent from Chiswick,
in which the terminal flowers had coalesced, producing a large
campanulate structure. This is a familiar monstrosity ; but it
appears that M. Vilmorin has succeeded in fixing it; over
95 per cent. of seedlings, raised from the normal flowers of the
spike, are said to come true, and bear these campanulate
blossoms.
Fasciate Buttercup.—A rather curious example was sent by
Miss Corpen of Highfield, Hartley, Plymouth, found at Denham
Bridge, Devon. Two fasciated stems were so slightly
coherent as to readily separate, while the two synanthic
blossoms, however, remained firmly coherent.
Definite Lily of the Valley—Mr. Henslow showed a flower
in this unusual condition, in that a scape bore a single terminal
flower, in which the whorls were in fours, excepting the pistil.
Romneya with fungus.—Rev. W. Dod sent specimens of
R. Coulteri badly attacked by some fungus. It was forwarded
to Kew for investigation.
ex PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Grapes diseased.—Samples of fruit, together with leaves,
were received from Mr. James Cameron, of The Gardens, Auch-
terarder House, attacked by Gleosporium. The leaves appear
to be scalded, so that the opinion of the Committee was that
this mischief should have been carefully avoided. Bordeaux
spray at a very early period of the attack might have proved
efficacious in checking it. :
Campanula Balchiniana x .—Dr. Masters exhibited drawings
of a remarkable phenomenon in this variety. The plant has
variegated leaves, and is a hybrid between C. fragilis and
C. isophylla. The sepals are foliaceous, with petioles, while
the ovary is entirely superior, and not inferior, as in all the
Campanulacee. A full description is given at page 271.
Abnormal Fungi in a Mushroom Bed.—With reference to the
specimens shown at the last meeting, Mr. A. Sutton undertook to
transmit them to two eminent mushroom growers, who have
kindly sent the following reports: (1) ‘‘ Replying to your letter
of the 13th with sample of fungus sent, which is unknown.
Without seeing the bed or knowing more particulars of the
materials used for the same, I could hardly say for certain
whether it is caused from the manure not being properly
sweetened or from the mould used for casing, most probably
from the latter, as I have found this so generally the cause of
fungus and mildew, the spores being introduced through the
mould; especially, if this is used fresh from a pasture field, it
more often than not contains some kind of fungus. The only
plan to avoid this is to use mould, if possible, from an arable
field, or, without the turf, which has been stacked a year at
least, and when using mix a small quantity of salt or slacked
lime.’”’ (2) ‘“‘ Replying to your inquiry of the 13th inst., I beg to
inform you that the fungus sent is not frequently met with, but
I have seen some before. The reason one so seldom meets with
it on mushroom-beds is because the loam used in casing the beds
is usually procured from open ground, and not from the vicinity
of or from under trees. I have no doubt in the least but that
the fungus sent you is from the soil used, although soil used from
the same heap did not previously develop it, as perhaps the
previous lots of soil did not contain any of the spores, or that it
possibly generated subsequently. As several beds had been
cased from the same heap, I take it for granted that the soil
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTER, JUNE 29. CXxi
remained undisturbed for a length of time, and possibly under
tree or trees, which would account for its appearance in the last
bed. I should say the reason why mushrooms did not appear in
due course was, because the manure for the beds was not properly
prepared ; that it was made up too quickly, and consequently
burnt the mycelium in the sets; or that it was not sufficiently
fermented, and so rotted the mycelium. If your correspondent
makes up another bed, and obtains the soil for casing from else-
where, he will be convinced that the spawn is not to blame, no
matter where he had it from, as I never yet saw any false fungi
where the compost has been properly prepared and good loam
used. Could you procure a cake of the spawn for my inspection ?
If so, I will make a careful examination of it, and use it with
some that I am shortly spawning a bed with. I would then
report further on the subject.”
Fhododendron with Fungus.—Mr. W. Wilks brought a
specimen of the fungus Exobasidium rhododendri. It is de-
scribed in Dr. W. G. Smith’s edition of Tubeuf’s Diseases of
Plants, p. 427.
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, JUNE 29, 1897.
Mr. McLacutan in the Chair, and four members present.
Romneya diseased.—The following report was received from
Kew upon the specimens sent to the last meeting :—‘‘ The
disease is caused by an obscure organism, considered by Prunet
as a species of Cladochytrium. A preliminary notice is given in
Comptes Rendus, October 1, 1894. The detailed account there
promised is not yet to hand.”
Grapes attacked by Gleosporiwm.—With reference to the
examples sent to the last meeting, Mr. Malcolm Dunn writes,
after inspecting the Vine-houses at Auchterarder House, that
“the vinery is of the usual ‘lean-to’ form, well heated and
ventilated, with everything in good order for growing healthy
vines and first-rate grapes. The vines comprise some six or
seven varieties, but only Black Hamburgh suffers to a serious
extent from the disease; although it could be detected on a few
berries of Foster’s White Seedling, and still fewer of Alicante.
As far as I can remember, Muscat of Alexandria, Lady Downes,
Madresfield Court, Gros Colmar, and one or two others were
Cxll PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
not affected, and, although intermixed with the vines attacked,
the vines are all in vigorous health, and bearing a fine crop
of splendid bunches of grapes. With regard to the treatment
they were receiving, I saw nothing to which I could object.”’
Harpalus ruficorms attacking Strawberries.—Mr. McLachlan
showed specimens of this beetle, which belongs to a carnivorous
family. Its prevalence in Strawberry beds is probably caused
by the presence of the litter. That it will attack Strawberries
has been known for the last ten years, and that it has destroyed
entire crops. As it is nocturnal in its habits, it must be
looked for at night, for it lives in the soil.
SciENTIFIC CoMMITTEE, JuLY 13.
Dr. M. T. Mastxrs, in the Chair, and five members present.
Malformed Fungi in Mushroom Bed.—A letter was received
from Mr. Taylor, Penbedw, Mold, criticising the reports sent to
the last meeting with reference to the loam, as he had splendid
results last year with the same loam cut from the open pasture.
As the specimens have been lost in the transit to Kew, the
committee has been unable to receive the report of an expert
upon the fungi themselves.
Cucumber with Adherent Leaf.—A specimen was received
from Mr. E. Horsley. The petiole of the leaf had become
fused with the base of the fruit, the result being a distortion
in the latter—a not uncommon phenomenon.
Cattleya, Synanthic.—This was a fusion between two
flowers, the effect being to arrest some parts of the whorls, so
that each flower became dimerous. ‘There were two lips.
Poppy with Pistilloid Stamens.—A flower of Papaver Rheas
was exhibited with this peculiarity. It is rare in this species,
but not infrequent in some others, as the Icelandic.
Chemical Composition of Cattleya.—Two papers prepared by
Mr. Smee were laid before the committee by Mr. Veitch, to
whom they had been addressed, as Chairman of the Orchid
Committee. The first contained some figures connected with
the composition of the atmosphere; analyses of old and young
pseudo-bulbs were also given, and of the flower, including
observations upon the colouring matters of plants. Professor
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, JULY 13. exlil
A. Church, having given consideration to the first of the two
papers, reserving the second for a future meeting, remarked that
Mr. Smee had scarcely paid sufficient attention to the more
recent analyses of the atmosphere and of rain; the amount of
CO, in the free air over land and sea being now found to be
almost absolutely uniform everywhere (except where locally
contaminated), and less in quantity than 3 parts in 10,000, so
that no conclusions could be drawn from the data furnished in
the paper on this point. With regard to the amount of
ammonia in the air, it is so infinitesimally small in quantity
that it can only be estimated by the most modern and refined
chemical operations, so that he was obliged to express some
hesitation in accepting Mr. Smee’s statements on this point.
With regard to Mr. Smee’s analysis of pseudo-bulbs and of
flowers, Prof. Church observed that they agreed fairly well with
the average results hitherto obtained from terrestrial and
epiphytic plants, but he thought that the percentage of undeter-
mined ash constituents—viz. about one-half, was far too great,
and he questioned the presence of aluminium, observing that
though terrestrial species of Lycopodium contain much of this
metal, epiphytal species of the same genus contain none. He
felt sure that some ingredient was wanting which had not been
determined. With regard to floral colouring matters, Mr. Smee
did not appear to have consulted recent researches. Professor
Church had proved that a number of reds, blues, and purples,
though called by different names—e.g. cole in the Coleus,
erythrophyll in Copper Beech, fruits, &c., enolinin black grapes and
anthocyanin—were absolutely the same thing, being represented
by the formula C.)H,)0,). These became purplish in neutral
cells, blue in alkaline, and red in acid cells. Hven the blue-
green of a certain Ixia was due toan alkaline solution of the same
substance. With regard to the beetroot, however, and plants
allied to it, as the Amaranthus and Buckwheat, he found that the
red-purple was of a different nature, and he had called it
“amaranthin.”’ It gave neither a scarlet nor a blue reaction,
neither green nor yellow with acids, but Prof. Church had as yet
not determined its actual chemical composition, although he
had found it to differ from anthocyanin by its insolubility in
absolute alcohol, and by the absence from its spectrum of
definite absorption bands. With regard to nutritive solutions,
CXiVv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Professor Church thought that the ordinary solutions for plant-
culture containing phosphates and salts of lime should be used
for Orchids, not the solution surcharged with nitrogen compounds
recommended by Mr. Smee. He would suggest spraying with
“ pulverised ”’ solutions the epiphytal Orchids, for he had proved
with Echeverias—as Boussingault had also long ago with other
plants—that salts if moist could be absorbed by the surface of
the leaf, so that when a lithium salt was placed upon a lower
leaf, it was detected in others above. Dr. McNab had previously
proved the transmission of lithium salts imbibed by the roots
throughout the plant, following the suggestion of Prof. Church
to use this salt. Mr. Veitch and Dr. Masters called attention
to the practice carried out by amateur Orchid growers of
scattering fragments of carbonate of ammonia (smelling salts)
so that the vapour might be absorbed. Mr. Henslow suggested
that it might be absorbed with the aid of vapour of water, as he
had found by experiments that this can be absorbed by leaves.—
(“Transpiration in a Saturated Atmosphere,’ Journ. Lin,
Soc., Bot., xxiii. p. 308.) |
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, JULY 27.
Dr. M. T. Masrrs in the Chair, and six members present.
Hybrid Orchid.—Myr. Veitch exhibited a new hybrid—
Epilelia x —between Epidendrum radicans and Lelia purpurata.
The former grows to from 7 to 8 feet in height, but the hybrid
is only about 18 inches. Its leaves more resemble those of
Lelia, nor does it root so freely as the Epidendrum. The
flowers are larger than those of the latter parent, and scarlet,
but with a much broader and blotched lip, approximating to
that of the Lelia, though the deep mauve colour of this species
is entirely wanting. Mr. Veitch observed that it is remarkable
that the pollen of Epidendrum radicans is potential in crossing
Lelia, Cattleya, and Sophronitis, but not with itself. Dr.
Masters remarked that this hybrid thus corroborated Reichen-
bach’s statement that the genera Lelia and Epidendrum were
identical.
Apples Diseased.—Dr. Bonavia inquired as to the nature of
a disease which so commonly attacks Apples. Dr. Masters
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, JULY 27. CXV
pronounced it to be most probably Fusicladium dentriticum,
which attacks Apples and Pears, causing them to crack. Mr.
Veitch observed that it generally occurs when the tree is in a
poor condition, and recommended a renewal of soil in the
autumn to strengthen the growth.
Wheat-eared Carnations.—Some examples of this well-known
peculiarity were received from Mr. Colvile Browne, of Hextable,
Kent. Mr. Veitch observed that whenever carnations were
grown in large quantities for market, some plants appear among
them with this malformation. Dr. Masters added that it was
said that the immediate cause was the attack by mites at the
apex.
Twin Apple Leaf—Mr. Browne also sent a specimen in
which two leaves were apparently united half-way up, and back
to back. An examination of the distribution of the fibro-
vascular cords showed that there was only one petiole, a section
of which was crescent-shaped, with three or four cords on each
half. These coalesced higher up into two distinct bands, from
which the cords supplied to each of the twin blades arose. It
was analogous to a foliaceous stamen of Jatropha, described by
Dr. Masters (Teratology, p. 255).
Lantana attacked by Insects.—Specimens were received
from Chiswick covered with a white mealy-bug known as
Orthezia insignis, Douglas.
Seeds germinating within a Melon.—A specimen was
received in which this peculiarity had occurred. It is not
infrequent in Cucumbers, Oranges, and the Papaw. It was
observed that the cotyledons were green, though in the absence
of light within the fruit. Such occurs also in Pistachio Nuts,
Mistletoe, pods of Cassia fistula, &c. Professor Church remarked
that it probably arose from some modification of the rays of
light, which were capable of “ greening,” although their energy
was altered in character. It is observable that plants turn
green under all the coloured rays of the spectrum, though
Ferns will be green in total darkness if the temperature be
adequate.
Pelorian Calceolaria.—Mr. Henslow showed two flowers of
the ordinary yellow bedding-out plant, which had assumed the
sleeve-like shape instead of the usual slipper.
Cypripedium, Two-lipped.—Dr. Masters showed a specimen
CXVi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
with this malformation, the flower being apparently also changed
as to the number of its parts. It appeared to be really synanthic,
like the Cattleya shown at the last meeting.
Rosa rubrifolia.—He also showed a spray of this red-leaved
species, received from Mr. G. Paul, having the gall, ‘ Robin’s
pincushion,’ likewise intensified in colour.
Hybrid Aristolochia.—Dr. Masters showed a. blossom of the
first hybrid ever raised in this genus, between A. brasiliensis
(form) and A. elegans, from Bolivia.
Cream-colowred Vallota.—He also exhibited blossoms of this
variety. A white one is known to have existed, but is apparently
lost to cultivation. It was suggested that crossings should be
made with the present one, so that possibly the white variety
may reappear.
Chemical Analyses of Orchids.—Professor Church, having
carefully considered Mr. Smee’s second paper on the chemical
processes which are supposed to take place in Orchids, observed
that it was somewhat difficult to follow the author’s observations
as there was a want of systematic cohesion throughout the
paper, some parts appearing to be rather irrelevant, and others
open to question. Thus, chemists are not agreed upon the
composition of chlorophyll; and if they were, there would be in
consequence no special light thrown on the cultivation of
Orchids. In his observation upon the presence of nitrogen
in sewage-grass, Mr. Smee had altogether omitted any mention
of nitrates, and no conclusions can be drawn from the absolute
quantities given, as they bear no relation to the actual quantities
employed, but not stated in the experiments. The diagram
supplied by Mr. Smee, Professor Church thought interesting, as
approximately representing the gradual loss of earthy salts as
one of the causes of decline and death. With reference to his
observations on phosphates in connection with the flowering
process, it is well known that phosphates generally increase the
inflorescence, while nitrogen enhances the foliage, and deepens
the green colour of chlorophyll; but Mr. Smee’s remarks upon
the decomposition of phosphates are extremely doubtful. It has
been found in all experiments that ammonias in which phos-
phorus has replaced nitrogen have always proved fatal to
plants. Mr. Smee’s experiments on scents, as being formed in
the flower itself, are well founded. Lastly, the suggestion that
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, AuGuUST 10. exvii
thorough analyses should be made of all parts of Orchids was
advisable, if practicable ; but such would require very accurate
work on definite lines. Such only would give valuable results.
ScrentTIFIc CoMMITTEE, AucusT 10.
Dr. M. T. Masters in the Chair, and three members present.
Vine Leaves defective-—Some vine leaves, which appear to
have decayed prematurely, were exhibited. No fungus was
present, and their defective appearance was attributable to too
high cultivation, guano being freely used with great heat,
and too much water, such being quite consistent with their
appearance.
Ribes aurewm in Fruit.—Dr. Masters exhibited a branch,
bearing a raceme of ripe purple-black berries, of this common
shrub. Though introduced by Mr. Douglas from California, the
fruit has rarely if ever been seen before. It was received from
Mr. Veitch.
Chrysanthemum Leaves attacked by Grubs.—These were
received from Mr. Jenkins, and were forwarded to Mr. McLachlan,
who reports “that the grubs are very young larve of the ‘ Silver
Y-mouth’ (Plusia gamma). It will attack almost anything.
They should be destroyed by hand-picking.”’ The caterpillars
are doing considerable damage to the Chrysanthemums.
Green-flowered Cross-leaved Heath.—Dr. Masters showed
specimens of this unusual condition. It resembles the
“ Wheat-eared’’ Carnations sent to the last meeting, and con-
sists of an abnormal repetition of ciliated bracts; the flower in
the centre having been arrested in consequence of an attack by
some grub.
Pelargoniwms decaying.—Examples of the varieties Vesuvius
and West Brighton were shown, which had decayed from the
collar upwards. It was attributed to too deep planting. They
had large roots, and had been apparently quite healthy when
planted, some being over two-year-old plants. Possibly they
were attacked by a slime fungus.
CXVill PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE.
JUNE 15, 1897.
T. Francis Rivers, Esq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Bronze Knightian Medal.
To Lord Foley (gr. Mr. Miller), Ruxley Lodge, Esher, for a
collection of fruit.
Award of Merit.
To Cabbage ‘ Veitch’s Earliest of All’ (votes, unanimous),
grown at Chiswick from seed sent by Messrs. R. Veitch, of
Exeter.
To Cabbage ‘ Sutton’s Earliest’ (votes, unanimous), grown
at Chiswick from seed sent by Messrs. Sutton, of Reading.
These two cabbages were included in a collection of nineteen
varieties which had been grown at Chiswick to test their earli-
ness. These two were fit for use on May 15, and were three
weeks earlier than ‘ Ellam’s,’ sown on the same date. Both of
them are very fine early cabbages, Veitch’s being rather dwarfer
and a trifle the more forward; Sutton’s rather larger and very
conical. See p. 129.
Other Exhibits.
J. 8. White, Esq. (gr. Mr. Martin), East Cowes Park, sent a
Melon ‘ Sixtieth Reign.’
KE. Dresden, Esq. (gr. Mr. Tallack), Livermere Park, sent
three dishes of very finely kept Apples, ‘ Wellington,’ ‘ Easter
Pippin,’ and ‘ Norfolk Beaufin.’
Earl Perey (gr. Mr. Wythes), Syon House, sent a Melon,
‘Thames Bank,’ a cross between ‘Syon House’ and ‘ Beauty of
Syon.’ The fruit sent was bluntly oval in shape, red-fleshed,
and beautifully netted. It was considered promising, but was
not quite ripe.
Lady Fortescue (gr. Mr. Herrin), Dropmore, sent a Melon,
a cross between ‘ Hero of Lockinge’ and ‘ La Favorite,’ which
was over-ripe.
Dr. Burrell (gr. Mr. Bishop), Westley Hall, sent four Melons,
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, JUNE 29, CX1X
(1) ‘Dr. Lionel Burrell’ (‘ Westley Hall’ x ‘High Cross
Hybrid’), a long oval fruit very green-skinned, well netted,
green flesh, very juicy, and of pleasant if not very high flavour ;
(2) ‘ Westley Hybrid’ (‘ Nead’s Scarlet’ x ‘ High Cross Hybrid’),
a round fruit with white skin and green flesh, very juicy; (3)
‘Westley Defiance’ (‘Wm. Tillery’ x ‘ Westley Hall’), a long
oval fruit with dark green skin, flesh green and very deep.
This was not quite ripe. (4) ‘Diamond Queen,’ a round fruit
with very little netting, white skin, and scarlet flesh.
Mr. W. Palmer, Andover, sent Peas, ‘Sutton’s Al’ and
‘ Gradus.’
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, JUNE 29, 1897.
JosEPH CHEAL, Esq., in the Chair, and twelve members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To Strawberry ‘ Mentmore’ (votes, 6 for, 4 against), from
Messrs. Laxton, Bedford.
7 ss
, POR see —,
at a F
_—_—
pie
Fic, 70.—Crimista Munror. (Gardeners’ Magazine.)
To Delphinium ‘Sir John Forrest’ (votes, 10 for), from
Messrs. Kelway & Son, Langport. A grand spike, with large
deep violet-purple flowers with a white eye.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JONE 15. ; CXXXVI1i
To Delphinium ‘ Clara Stubbs’ (votes, 10 for, 2 against),
from Messrs. Kelway & Son. Flowers dark blue, with a white
centre.
Fic. 71.—Escattonia LanGueyvensis. (Jowrnal of Horticulture.)
To Doryopteris nobilis Duvalii (votes, 14 for), from Messrs.
J. Veitch & Sons. A dwarf-growing variety with broad deep
green palmate fronds.
To Escallonia Langleyensis (HK. sanguinea g x H. Philip-
piana Pp) (votes, 14 for), from Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons. A
distinct and very free-flowering variety of slender growth, with
. ae
CXXXVili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
small lanceolate deep green leaves and small bell-shaped rose-
pink flowers. Fig. 71.
To Pink ‘Albino’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J. Lamb,
Burton Joyce, Notts.; and Mr. F. Gifford, Tottenham. A fine
variety with large, pure white, sweet-scented flowers.
To Iris germanica maxima (votes, 11 for, 1 against), from Mr.
T. S. Ware, Tottenham. Standards erect, broad, pale blue ;
falls rich purplish blue.
To Calochortus Gunisonii (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
R. Wallace & Co., Colchester. A very beautiful species with
large white flowers, with a greenish-yellow centre covered with
yellow hairs.
Other Exhibits.
F. W. Moore, Esq., Botanic Garden, Glasnevin, sent cut
flowers of Fremontia californica, Kniphofias, Abutilons, &ce.
From Martin R. Smith, Esq., Warren House, Hayes (gr.
Mr. Blick), came a collection of Carnations.
H. J. Elwes, Esq., Colesbourne Park, Andoversford, exhibited
an unnamed species of Arum.
K. H. Watts, Esq., Devonhurst, Chiswick (gr. Mr. Gibson),
sent a new Coleus named ‘ Minnie Watts.’
J. Higson, Esq., Oakmere Hall, Northwich (gr. Mr. Brunton),
sent a seedling Geranium.
Pandeli Ralli, Esq., Alderbrook, Cranbrook (gr. Mr. Barks),
exhibited Carnation ‘ Pandeli Ralli.’
G. Yeld, Esq., Clifton Cottage, York, brought a group of
Irises and Day Lilies.
A. G. Renshaw, Esq., Lepe, Exbury, Southampton, sent a
collection of Columbines.
Mr. J. T. Gilbert, Dyke, Bourne, Lincs., sent two varieties of
Anemones.
Mr. G. Dunn, Adrian Road, Abbots Langley, sent a varie-
gated form of the well-known zonal Pelargonium ‘Henry Jacoby.’
J. W. Thompson, Esq., Holywath Cottage, Coniston,
Lancashire, sent a specimen of Nephrolepis nana.
Mr. W. Palmer, Junction Road, Andover, sent a Pink named
‘ Diamond Jubilee.’
Mr. C. G. Van Tubergen, jun., Haarlem, sent some very fine
blooms of Iris Gatesi.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JUNE 15.
»
A
NS
~~
1
WE
et Z CS
Hip
NH)
Wits
Fic. 72.—DIERVILLA SESSILIFLORA.
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
CXXX1Xx
cxl PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
From Mr. C. Turner, Slough, came a group of Carnations.
Mr. C. Dymott, Millbrook Road, Freemantle, sent a group of
Pelargonium ‘ Harry Dymott.’
Mr. Gifford, Tottenham, exhibited a group of Delphiniums.
FLoRAL CoMMITTEE, JUNE 29, 1897.
W. MarsuHatu, Esq., in the Chair, and eighteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Gold Medal.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a magnificent col-
lection of Conifers and hardy shrubs, amongst the latter being
the beautiful yellow flowering Diervilla sessiliflora. Fig. 72.
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To J. P. Morgan, Esq., Dover House, Roehampton (gr. Mr.
McLeod), for a large group of Malmaison Carnations.
Silver Gilt Banksian Medal.
To Mr. H. B. May, Upper Edmonton, for 108 varieties of
Adiantums.
To Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, for a group of
Anthuriums, Begonias, Watsonias, and Orchids.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. W. Cutbush & Son, Highgate, for Carnations.
To Messrs. Dobbie & Co., Rothesay, for Sweet Peas, Violas,
and Pansies.
To Messrs. R. Wallace & Co., Colchester, for a collection of
Calochorti and Lilies.
To Mr. T. 8. Ware, Tottenham, for hardy flowers.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. W. Paul & Sons, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
To Mr. M. Prichard, Christchurch, for hardy flowers.
To Messrs. H. Cannell & Sons, Swanley, for Begonias.
To Mr. F. G. Foster, Havant, for Sweet Peas.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JUNE 29, exli
To Messrs. Kelway & Son, Langport, for Delphiniums, Irises,
Gaillardias, and Cannas.
To Mr. W. Rumsey, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
To Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley, for a collection of
hardy flowering trees and shrubs.
To Messrs. Barr & Sons, Covent Garden, for hardy flowers.
First Class Certificate.
To Thuja gigantea aurea (votes, 12 for), from Messrs. J.
Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. A highly ornamental variety with rich
golden-yellow foliage.
To Adiantum fasciculatum (votes, 8 for), from Mr. H. B.
May, Edmonton. A vigorous growing variety of graceful
habit, with broad fronds and light green pinne.
Award of Merit.
To Carnation ‘Hampden’ (votes, 6 for, 2 against), from
Martin R. Smith, Ksq., The Warren, Hayes (gr. Mr. Blick). A
variety with large salmon-rose coloured flowers.
To H. T. Rose ‘ Kaiserin Augusta Victoria’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt. Flowers white with a
sulphur-yellow centre.
To H. T. Rose ‘ Souvenir de Président Carnot’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Messrs. Paul & Son. A fine variety with large pale
blush flowers.
To H. T. Rose ‘Madame A. Chatenay’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Paul & Son. A free-growing variety, with fragrant
flowers ; colour pale salmon, deeper towards the centre.
To Calochortus clavatus (votes, 9 for), from Mr. C. G. Van
Tubergen, Jun., Haarlem, and Messrs. R. Wallace & Co., Col-
chester. A very rare species of great beauty. Flowers large,
golden-yellow with purple anthers, and brown markings at the
base of the petals.
To H. T. Rose ‘Marquise Litta’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross. A very distinct variety,
with rich rosy-carmine flowers.
To Begonia ‘Lady Pearson’ (votes, 7 for), from Messrs. J.
Laing & Sons, Forest Hill. A handsome variety, with large
double salmon-scarlet flowers of good form.
exlii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Botanical Certificate.
To Encephalartos gracilis (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
F. Sander & Co., St. Albans.
‘Other Exhibits.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain), sent
examples of Hedysarum multijugum and Myosotis palustris
erandiflora.
From Lord Penzance, Hashing Park, Godalming, came a
group of Roses.
Purnell Purnell, Esq., Woodlands, Streatham Hill, staged a
small group of Carnations.
R. Foster, Esq., Homewood, Chislehurst (gr. Mr. Last), sent
a seedling Carnation.
A. Chandler, Esq., Haslemere, sent specimens of Delphinium
‘Ethel Hutchinson.’
H. Barnard, Esq., Chase Side, Southgate, sent a Lobelia
named ‘ Barnard’s Gem.’
Mr. J. Douglas, Edenside, Great Bookham, exhibited Carna-
tion ‘ Mrs. Patrick Campbell.’
Messrs. W. Atlee Burpee & Co., Philadelphia, U.S.A., sent
seven new varieties of Sweet Peas. The Committee requested
that seed might be sent to Chiswick for trial.
Mr. J. Lamb, Burton Joyce, Notts., sent exceptionally fine
flowers of Pink ‘ Albino.’
Mr. C. Leeson, Wrawby, Brigg, sent a large-flowered Begonia
named ‘ Charles Leeson.’
Mr. W. Wells, Redhill, Surrey, sent a small group of early
flowering Chrysanthemums.
ROSE SHOW.
Mrixep VARIETIES.
Class 1. Twenty-four single trusses, distinct. Amateurs.
First, Silver Cup or £4, to T. B. Haywood, Esq., Woodhatch,
Reigate (gr. Mr. Salter); second, £2, to C. J. Grahame, Esq.,
Leatherhead ; third, £1, to Rev. J. H. Pemberton, Havering,
Kssex.
Class 2. Twelve single trusses, distinct. Amateurs. First,
£2, to O. G. Orpen, Esq., West Bergholt, Colchester ; second,
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JULY 5. exliii
£1.10s., to Rev. A. Foster-Melliar, Sproughton Rectory, Ipswich ;
third, £1, to R. H. Langton, Esq., Raymead, Hendon.
Class 8. Six single trusses, distinct. Amateurs. First, £1,
to G. W. Cook, Esq., Torrington Park, near Finchley ; second,
15s., to Rev. F. Page Roberts, Scole, Norfolk; third, 10s., to
J. Christian, Esq., 3 Norman Villas, Highgate.
Class 4. Nine single trusses of any one variety of H.P. or H.T.
Amateurs. First, £1. 10s., to C. J. Grahame, Ksq.; second, £1,
to T. B. Haywood, Esq. (gr. Mr. Salter); third, 15s., to Rev. F.
Page Roberts.
Class 5. Six single trusses of any one variety of H.P. or H.T.
Amateurs. First, £1, to O. G. Orpen, Esq.; second, 15s., to
R. H. Langton, Esq.; third, 10s., to G. W. Cook, Esq.
TEAS AND NoISsETTEE.
Class 6. Twenty-four single trusses, not less than twelve
varieties or more than three trusses of any one variety. Amateurs.
First, Silver Cup or £4, to O. G. Orpen, Esq.; second, £2, to
C. J. Grahame, Esq.; third, £1, to T. B. Haywood, Esq. (gr.
Mr. Salter).
Class 7. Twelve single trusses, not less than nine varieties, or
more than two trusses of any one variety. Amateurs. First,
£2, to Rev. Hugh A. Berners, Harkstead Rectory, Ipswich ;
second, £1. 10s., to Rev. A. Foster Melliar; third, £1, to Rev.
J. H. Pemberton.
Class 8. Six single trusses, not less than four varieties.
Amateurs. First, £1, to Rev. F. Page Roberts; second, 15s., to
R. H. Langton, Esq.
Class 9. Nine single trusses of any one variety. Amateurs.
First, £1. 10s., to C. J. Grahame, Esq.; second, £1, to O. G.
Orpen, Esq.
Class 10. Six single trusses of any one variety. Amateurs.
First, £1, to R. H. Langton, Esq.; second, 15s., to Rev. A.
Foster Melliar ; third, 10s., to Rev. Hugh A. Berners.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, JuLy 5, 1897. At CHISWICK.
W. MarsHa 1, Esq., in the Chair, and nine members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To Viola ‘ Blue Gown’ (votes, unanimous), from Dr. Stuart,
exliv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Hillside, Churnside, N.B. Plant of dwarf habit, very free
flowering; flowers large, blue, yellow eye. It stands drought well.
To Viola ‘ William Neil’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dobbie & Co., Rothesay. Plant of bushy habit, very free flower-
ing; flowers large, pale rosy lilac, lower petals pale lilac, yellow
eye. ?
To Viola ‘ Mrs. H. Bellamy ’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dobbie & Co. A free-growing variety with flowers of moderate
size; pale lavender margined with blue, lower petals bluish
purple, clear yellow eye.
Highly Commended.
To Viola ‘Iona’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Dobbie &
Co. Plant of dwarf spreading habit; flowers of medium size,
deep velvety blue, upper petal light blue, yellow eye.
To Viola ‘Pencaitland’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dobbie & Co. A fine variety of bushy habit; flowers large,
white, yellow eye, slightly rayed.
To Tea and Hybrid Tea Roses: ‘Augustine Halem,’
‘Innocente Pirola,’ ‘ White Lady,’ ‘Madame Pernet Ducher,’
Souvenir de Paul Néron,’ ‘ Marie Van Houtte,’ ‘Grand Duc de
Luxemberg,’ ‘ Etoile de Lyon,’ ‘ Francesca Kruger,’ ‘ Hon. Edith
Gifford,’ ‘ W. A. Richardson,’ and ‘ Edmund Sablayrolles.’
(See Report on Roses, page 283.)
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, Juty 18, 1897.
W. MarsHALL, EHsq., in the Chair, and twelve members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. H. B. May, Edmonton, for a large collection of
Aspleniums.
Silver Gilt Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a magnificent group
of hardy flowers.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. R. Wallace & Co., Colchester, for Lilies and
Calochorti.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JULY 13. exlv
To Mr. Frank Cant, Colchester, for Roses.
To Mr. Eckford, Wem, for Sweet Peas.
To Mr. Ladhams, Southampton, for hardy flowers.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for hardy flowers.
To Mr. B. R. Davis, Yeovil, for Begonias.
To Mr. J. Charlton, Tunbridge Wells, for hardy flowers.
To Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden, for hardy flowers.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. H. Cannell & Sons, Swanley, for double
Begonias.
First Class Certoficate.
To Nymphea Marliacea albida (votes, unanimous), from
Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Gunnersbury House (gr. Mr
Hudson). Flowers large, white, guard petals suffused with
pink.
To Platanus occidentalis argentea variegata (votes, unani-
mous), from Mr. J. Russell, Richmond. A very ornamental
hardy tree. The pale green foliage is deeply cut and heavily
splashed and suffused with silvery grey.
Award of Merit.
To Nymphea Ellisiana (votes, 10 for, 1 against), from
Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Acton (gr. Mr. Hudson). A beauti-
ful variety, with small deep crimson flowers and conspicuous
golden-yellow stamens.
To Salvia bicolor (votes, unanimous), from Sir Trevor
Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain). A very distinct species
from Morocco. It forms a vigorous-growing plant with branch-
ing spikes of pale blue flowers, with a white lip.
To Calochortus Plummere aureus (votes, unanimous), from
W. H. Wallace, Esq., Amory, China. A very handsome variety
with deep yellow flowers, the base of the petals being covered
with clear yellow hairs. )
To Carnation ‘Violet Douglas’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. J. Douglas, Great Bookham. The ground colour of this
lovely variety is sulphur yellow, striped and margined with rosy
pink.
exlvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Carnation ‘Sir Henry Irving’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. J. Douglas. Deep crimson flowers of moderate size and
good form.
To Carnation ‘Pelagia’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J.
Douglas. Flowers large, bright scarlet, flaked with slate.
To Carnation ‘ Badminton’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J.
Douglas. Flowers, sulphur yellow edged with deep pink.
To Lobelia tenuior grandiflora (votes, 8 for), from Mr. B.
Ladhams, Southampton. A distinct variety of slender habit
with light blue flowers.
To Tea Rose ‘ Sylph’ (votes, 11 for), from Messrs. W. Paul &
Son, Waltham Cross. A fine variety with delicate pink flowers
of good form.
To Begonia ‘ Miss Griffiths’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
Davis, Yeovil. A magnificent variety, with large double white
flowers slightly shaded with pink. Fi
Botanical Certvficate.
To Aristolochia Brasiliensis (votes, unanimous), from A.
Kingsmill, Esq., Harrow Weald.
Other Exhibits.
Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Gunnersbury House (gr. Mr.
Hudson), sent a beautiful collection of water Lilies.
C. F. Thompson, EKsq., Penhill Close, Cardiff, sent a seedling
Gaillardia.
From Mr. J. Douglas, Great Bookham, came a large collec-
tion of Carnations.
Mr. J. Fairbairn, Carlisle, sent two new Godetias.
Messrs. W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross, staged a small
collection of Roses.
Messrs. B. S. Williams & Son, Upper Holloway, sent Carna-
tion ‘ Queen of Yellows.’
From Messrs. R. Veitch & Son, Exeter, came a group of new
and little-known hardy shrubs.
Mr. H. Eckford, Wem, sent six new varieties of Sweet Peas.
Mr. H. W. Weguelin, St. Marychurch, Torquay, sent some
Carnations.
Mr. H.G. Smyth, Goldsmith Street, Drury Lane, sent a large
bunch of Carnation ‘ Jim Smyth.’
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JULY 14, exlvii
Messrs. A. W. Young & Co., Stevenage, staged a group of
hardy flowers.
Prizes.
Class 8.—Twelve bunches of hardy flowers; distinct kinds.
Amateurs: Prize, £2, to Mr. C. Herrin, Dropmore, Maidenhead.
Class 4.—Kight bunches of hardy flowers; distinct kinds.
Amateurs. Prize, £1. 10s., to Miss Debenham, St. Peters, St.
Albans.
Frorat ComMMITTEER, Juty 14, 1897. At CuIswick.
W. MarsHact, Ksq., in the Chair, and ten members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To Sweet Pea ‘ Countess Cadogan’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. Eckford, Wem. Large flowers of great substance; colour
light lavender blue, shaded with mauve on reverse of standard.
To Sweet Pea ‘ Prince of Wales’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. Eckford. A bright rose self, of intense colour; fine bold
form, large, three and frequently four flowers borne on long
stout stems.
To Sweet Pea ‘Lady Mary Currie’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. Eckford. Flowers deep orange pink, delicately shaded with
rosy mauve.
To Lantana hybrida (votes, unanimous), from R.H.S. Plant
of bushy habit with ovate, rough, serrated dark green leaves, and
clusters of orange-scarlet flowers thrown well above the foliage.
To Lantana ‘ Drap d’Or’ (votes, unanimous), from R.H.S.
Plant of dwarf habit; very free flowering; flowers rich canary
yellow.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JULY 27, 1897.
W. MarsuHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Gold Medal.
To Mr. H. J. Jones, Lewisham, for a magnificent display of
Begonias, Palms, Caladiums, and Ferns.
exlvili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. H. B. May, Upper Edmonton, for a very fine
collection of varieties of Pteris.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. T. 8. Ware, Tottenham, for hardy flowers.
To Messrs. R. Hartland & Son, Cork, for double Begonias.
To Messrs. Kelway & Son, Langport, for Gladiolus and
hardy flowers.
To Messrs. H. Cannell & Sons, Swanley, for cactaceous
plants.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for hardy flowering
shrubs.
To Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden, for hardy flowers.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for Roses and hardy
flowers.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for Lilies.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross, for a small
group of Roses.
Award of Merit.
To Gladiolus ‘General Duchesne’ (votes, unanimous), from
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr. Bain).
A vigorous growing variety, with large handsome flowers ; colour
carmine, striped with crimson and blotched with creamy white
on the lower segments.
To Croton Shuttleworthii (votes, 6 for, 4 against), from Mr.
J. Bugg, Eastgate House, Lincoln. A graceful variety with
long, narrow, twisted green and yellow leaves, with a bright red
midrib.
To Godetia ‘Gloriosa’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dobbie & Co., Rothesay. A very free-flowering variety of dwarf,
compact habit. Flowers large, cup-shaped, deep rich crimson.
To Gladiolus ‘Carlton’ (votes unanimous), from Messrs.
Kelway & Son, Langport. Flowers large and of good form,
carmine, blotched and feathered with white on the lower
segments.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JULY 27. exlix
To Gladiolus ‘ J. G. Clarke ’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Kelway & Son. Flowers large rosy purple, the lower segments
blotched with creamy white.
To Pelargonium (zonal) ‘Anna Bateson’ (votes, 18 for),
from Mr. Gilbert Davidson, Ammanford, South Wales. Plant
of dwarf compact habit, with double salmon-pink flowers freely
produced.
To Hibiscus celestis (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. J.
Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. A beautiful hardy free-flowering shrub.
Flowers large, blue, centre deep crimson.
To Hibiscus ‘ Painted Lady ’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
J. Veitch & Sons. Flowers large, single, blush white, with a
crimson centre.
To Veronica ‘La Séduisante’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons. A free-flowering hardy (?) shrub
with bronze-green foliage and large spikes of deep purple
flowers.
To Tea Rose ‘G. Narbonnand’ (votes, 15 for), from Messrs.
W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross. A distinct variety with large
pale pink flowers.
To Phlox ‘ Lord Raleigh’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Paul & Son, Cheshunt. Jbluish-purple flowers of moderate size,
and borne in dense trusses.
To Phlox ‘Evénement’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Paul & Son, Cheshunt, and Mr. Forbes, Hawick. A very hand-
some variety with large trusses of salmon-rose flowers.
To Heliopsis Pitcheriana (votes, 10 for, 2 against), from
Messrs. Paul & Son. A free-flowering variety with large bright
yellow flowers.
To Rosa rugosa atropurpurea (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Paul & Son. Flowers rich crimson, produced in clusters
with exceptional freedom.
To Canna ‘Elsie Perkins’ (votes, 8 for, 4 against), from
Messrs. Paul & Son. Plant of dwarf habit, with small pale
yellow flowers.
To Phlox ‘Bouquet de St. Cyr’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden, and Mr. Forbes, Hawick.
A free-flowering variety of dwarf habit. Large white flower
with a rosy crimson eye.
cl PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Other Exhibits.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr. Bain),
staged a collection of Gladioli and Pentstemons.
H. 8. Bartleet, Esq., Shooter’s Hill, sent Sweet Pea‘ Pauline.’
The Duke of Marlborough, Blenheim Palace, Woodstock (gr.
Mr. Whillans), sent four seedling Carnations.
Mrs. Chilton, Wealdstone, Middlesex, sent Mésembryan
mum Bolonsi.
From Major Howey, The Grange, Woodbridge, came Begonia
‘Melton Beauty.’
E. Hibbert, Esq., Ashby St. Ledgers, Rugby, sent a seedling
Carnation.
Mr. A. W. Edwards, Elmeslae Gardens, Stamford, sent
Carnations.
Messrs. Atlee Burpee & Co., Philadelphia, U.S.A., sent pot
plants of their new Sweet Pea ‘ Pink Cupid.’
Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley, sent a group of Dahlias.
Messrs. W. J. Stokes & Son, Trowbridge, sent an everlasting
Pea named ‘Her Majesty,’ which the Committee considered to
be the same as ‘ Delicata.’
From Messrs. Hurst & Son, Houndsditch, came specimens of
everlasting Pea ‘ Pink Beauty.’
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, sent a group of
Watsonia Ardernei.
Prize.
Class 8.—Collection of cactaceous plants. Amateurs. Prize,
Silver Flora Medal, to W. P. Bodkin, Esq., Westhill Place,
Highgate.
FLoRAL CoMMITTEE, JuLY 27, 1897. Atv CHISWICK.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and ten members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To Phlox ‘ Beatrice’ (votes, unanimous), from M. Lemoine,
Nancy, and Mr. Forbes, Hawick. Plant of dwarf bushy habit,
very free flowering. Flowers borne in large trusses, rose pink
suffused with salmon.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, JULY 27. eli
To Phlox ‘ Coquelicot’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. Forbes.
A magnificent variety with large orange-scarlet flowers with a
deeper eye. This Phlox was considered by some to be better
even than ‘ Hina.’
To Phlox ‘ Beranger’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. Forbes.
An exceptionally free-flowering variety of dwarf bushy habit.
Flowers rose pink, shaded with violet.
To Phlox ‘Torpilleur’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J.
Forbes. Plant of dwarf habit, very free flowering. Flowers
borne in immense panicles; colour rosy carmine, deeper
centre.
To Canna ‘ Corsaire’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Vil-
morin, Paris. Foliage bronze green. Flowers large, deep orange
Scarlet.
To Canna ‘Alemannia’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dammann, Italy. Plant of sturdy habit, producing fine spikes of
very large flowers; colour brownish crimson, with a wide irregular
margin of golden yellow.
To Canna ‘ Stadtrath Heidenreict’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. Pfitzer, Stuttgart. Vigorous grower, with bronze-green
foliage. Rich orange scarlet-flowers borne on long spikes.
To Canna ‘ Hofgartendirector Lanche’ (votes, unanimous),
from Mr. Pfitzer. Plant of dwarf habit, with immense flowers
borne in large trusses, orange red spotted with crimson, and
irregularly margined with canary yellow.
To Canna ‘ Doyen Jean Leopold’ (votes, unanimous), from
_ Messrs. Vilmorin. Plant of dwarf sturdy habit, with large and
finely formed flowers borne on very stout spikes; petals very
broad, canary yellow spotted with pale brown.
To Canna ‘ Edward Mieg’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Vilmorin. Plant dwarf, very free flowering, large and of good
form ; colour scarlet, shaded with orange.
To Canna ‘America’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dammann. Foliage bronze green. Flowers orange, shaded with
crimson.
To Pentstemon ‘ President Carnot’ (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. J. Forbes, Hawick. Plant of vigorous habit, very free
flowering. Flowers large, rosy crimson, throat blush white
A grand variety.
To Pentstemon ‘George Ulrich’ (votes, unanimous), from
P 2
eli PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Mr. J. Forbes. Flowers of moderate size, fiery scarlet with a
white throat.
To Pentstemon ‘ Sandorff’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J.
Forbes. Plant of very bushy habit. Flowers borne on stout
spikes with exceptional freedom, mauve with a white throat.
Commended.
To Pentstemon ‘ Cassiope’ (votes, unanimous), from R.H.S.
Flowers of moderate size, rosy purple, crimson throat, upper —
segments blush white.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, AuaustT 10, 1897.
W. MarsHAtt, Esq., in the Chair, and fifteen members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gult Banksian Medal.
- To Messrs. Kelway & Son, Langport, for a collection of
Gladioli and Gaillardias.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a very fine display
of Annuals—Tagetes, Godetias, Linums, Clarkias, Calliopsis
Asters, &c.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. M. Prichard, Christchurch, for hardy flowers.
To Mr. S. Mortimer, Farnham, for Show, Fancy, and Cactus
Dahlias.
To Mr. T. 8. Ware, Tottenham, for hardy flowers.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain), for
Cannas and Gladioli.
To Messrs. R. Wallace & Co., Colchester, for Lilies, Mont-
bretias, and Gladioli.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for Cannas, Lilies,
and Statice Butcheri.
To Messrs. Barr & Sons, Covent Garden, for hardy ovetil
To Mr. J. Walker, Thame, for Show and Cactus Dahlias.
Bronze Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Dobbie & Co., Rothesay, for a group of
Marigolds. .
A \
YA» AS
Fig. 73.—CAaLcEOLARIA ALBA.
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
«liv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
First Class Certificate.
To Calceolaria alba (votes, unanimous), from J. T. Bennett-
Poé, Esq., Homewood, Cheshunt (gr. Mr. Downes). Plant of bushy
habit with small deep green linear opposite leaves, and pure
white flowers borne very freely in cymes at the apex of the
erowths. Fig. 73.
To Nymphea Marliacea flammea (votes, unanimous), from
J. T. Bennett-Poé, Esq., Cheshunt (gr. Mr. Downes). Flowers
very large, deep crimson, guard petals shaded with rose.
To Crinum Powelli album (votes, unanimous) from Sir
Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr. Bain). A
magnificent variety with large pure white funnel-shaped flowers
borne in umbels. Hardy in a sheltered position.
— Award of Merit.
To Gladiolus ‘G. A. Kuk’ (votes, unanimous), from Sir
Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Dorking (gr. Mr. Bain). Flowers very
large, purple, throat white streaked with crimson.
To Verbena ‘Tresserve’ (votes, unanimous), from J. T.
Bennett-Poé, Esq., Cheshunt (gr. Mr. Downes). Rose-coloured
flowers in large trusses.
To Gladiolus ‘Countess Amy’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Kelway & Son, Langport. Flowers large, rich rose with
white blotches on the lower petals.
To Gladiolus ‘Mike Lambourne’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Kelway & Son. A very handsome deep crimson variety.
To Gladiolus ‘ Countess of Leicester’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Kelway & Son. Exceptionally large flowers, white
feathered with rose pink.
To Rudbeckia laciniata ‘Golden Glow’ (votes, 5 for, 4
against), from Mr. M. Prichard, Christchurch ; Messrs. Kelway
& Son, Langport; and Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden. A
vigorous growing variety with deep yellow double flowers.
To Phlox ‘Kugéne Danzanvilliers’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Kelway & Son. A dwarf free-flowering variety ; lilac,
with a white eye.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Daffodil’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
J. Stredwick, Silverhall Park, St. Leonards. Soft yellow flowers
of moderate size with long narrow florets.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘Agnes Box’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
FLORAL COMMITTER, AUGUST 19. elv
J. Stredwick. Rich crimson flowers of good form, petals broad
and sharply pointed.
To Phlox ‘La Mathilde’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. T. §S.
Ware, Tottenham. The flowers of this late blooming variety
are of moderate size and of a distinct shade of purplish violet.
To Hollyhock ‘ Leander’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Webb & Brand, Saffron Walden. Flowers large and well formed,
soft yellow suffused with pink.
Other Exhibits.
I’. W. Moore, Esq., Botanic Garden, Glasnevin, sent a berried
spray of Pyrus Hostii.
Mr. W. Dolling, Whitehill, Newton Abbot, sent seedling
Dahlias.
From Mr. A. Hookings, Aldown House, Almondsbury, came
a Carnation named ‘ Mrs. Tudway.’
Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, sent sprays of hardy trees
and shrubs.
Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley, staged Cactus and Pompon
Dahlias.
From Messrs. A. W. Young & Co., Stevenage, came a group
of Carnations, Gloxinias, and Asters.
FLorAL CommitteEL, Auaust 19, 1897. At CHISWICK.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and four members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Highly Convmended.
To Ageratum americanum compactum ‘The Zoo’ (votes,
unanimous), from R.H.S. Plant of bushy habit; exceptionally
free flowering. The large heads of light blue flowers are very
enduring.
To Calliopsis nigra nana (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Watkins & Simpson. See page 302.
Also to the following bedding Pelargoniums :—
(1) Golden Tricolor—‘ Masterpiece.’
(2) Silver Tricolor—‘ Dolly Varden.’
(8) Golden Bronze—‘ Zulu,’ ‘Golden Harry Hieover,
‘ Maréchal Macmahon.’
elvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY,
(4) Silver-leaved—‘ Miss Kingsbury,’ ‘Boule de Neige,’
‘Flower of Spring.’
ABT
— SF
Fia. 74.—Ficus RADICANS VARTEGATA. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
(5) Yellow-leaved—‘ Creed’s Seedling.’
(6) Green-leaved—‘ Sir Hamilton,’ ‘ Mrs. Barmy,’ ‘ Albion,’
‘Triomphe de Stella,’ ‘Henry Jacoby,’ ‘Raspail Improved,’
FLORAL COMMITTEE, AUGUST 24. — ¢elvil
‘ Adolphe Brisson,’ ‘Mad. Roechlin Schwartz,’ ‘ Boule de Neige,’
‘ Advancer,’ ‘ Captain H. Colville.’
A descriptive Report on Pelargoniums will appear when the
trial is completed.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, AuaustT 24, 1897.
W. Marsuatt, Esq., in the Chair, and fourteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. J. Laing & Sons, Forest Hill, for a group of
Caladiums, Crotons, Gloxinias, Palms, and Ferns.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Purnell Purnell, Esq., Woodlands, Streatham Hill, for
foliage and flowering plants.
To Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for Cactus and Pompon
Dahlias.
To Messrs. R. Wallace & Co., Colchester, for Lilies, Mont-
bretias, and Gladioli.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a collection of hardy
Ericas.
First Class Certificate.
To Ficus radicans variegata (votes, unanimous), from Mr. W.
Bull, Chelsea. Fig. 74. See page Ixxv.
Award of Merit.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Night’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J.
Stredwick, Silver Hill Park, St. Leonards. A very handsome
variety with large deep maroon flowers.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘Amber’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. J.
Stredwick. Large yellow flowers, guard petals flushed with pale
orange.
To Show Dahlia ‘ Marjorie ’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr. C.
Turner, Slough. Large bronzy-yellow flowers, tipped and
suffused with light purple.
elviii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Pompon Dahlia ‘ Hypatia’ (votes, 7 for, 2 against), from
Mr. C. Turner. Small terra cotta flowers, shaded with salmon.
- To Pompon Dahlia ‘ Phryne’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
C. Turner. A very distinct variety with orange flowers tipped
with scarlet.
To Pompon Dahlia ‘ Vesta’ (votes, 8 for, 1 against), from
Mr. C. Turner. Pure white flowers of good form and excellent
quality.
‘Fic. 75.—CrpHanorus roniicunarts. (Jowrnal of Horticulture.)
Other Exhibits.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr. Bain),
sent blooms of Clematis Davidiana.
G. H. McCulloch, Esq., Dissington Hall, Northumberland,
sent ten seedling Carnations.
F. D. Lambert, Esq., Moor Hall, Cookham (gr. Mr. Fulford),
sent a very fine yellow-flowered Hibiscus.
Jacob Wakefield, Esq., Sedgwick House, Kendal (gr. Mr.
Ireland), sent flowers of a very fine seedling Dipladenia.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 7. clix
Mr. J. H. Cox, Railway Terrace, Feltham, exhibited Pompon
Dahlia ‘ Golden Victoria.’
Mr. C. Bennett, Havant, sent Cactus Dahlias.
Messrs. W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross, staged a small group
of Roses.
From Mr. J. Green, Dereham, came nine new Cactus Dahlias.
The Committee asked to see these again.
Mr. G. Harris, Scads Hill, Orpington, sent a group of Show
Dahlias.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 7, 1897.
W. MarsHatu, Esq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To R. J. Measures, Eisq., Cambridge Lodge, Camberwell (gr.
Mr. Chapman), for a fine collection of Sarracenias and Cepha-
lotus. Fig. 75.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a group of Hardy
Shrubs and Nepenthes, amongst the latter being a grand plant
of N. Rajah. Fig. 76. See also pp. 226-262.
Silver Flora Medal.
To A. Pears, Esq., Spring Grove House, Isleworth (gr.
Mr. Farr), for Crotons.
To Mr. Knight Eames, Twickenham, for Eucharis amazonica.
To Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley, for Dahlias.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Mr. J. Walker, Thame, for Dahlias.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Barr & Son, Covent Garden, for hardy flowers.
To Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for hardy flowers.
First Class Certificate.
To Nepenthes Tiveyi (N. Veitchii ¢ N. Curtisii superba 9)
(votes, unanimous), from Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. The
‘/2 NATURAL SIZ
2s §
Fic. 76.—Nupuntuxs Ragan (Hoox. f.).
FLORAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 7. elxi
large yellowish-green pitchers are heavily streaked and blotched
with dull crimson. Fig. 58, page 246.
Award of Merit.
To Hibiscus ‘ Manihot’ (votes, 9 for), from F. D. Lambert,
Esq., Moor Hall, Cookham (gr. Mr. Fulford). An old-fashioned
annual, with large clear yellow flowers.
To Aster (Michaelmas Daisy) ‘ Mrs. W. Peters’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Mr. W. Peters, Givan’s Grove, Leatherhead. Plant
of very dwarf bushy habit; flowers large and white, with a
prominent yellow disc. ;
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ F. C. Pawle’ (votes, 7 for), from Messrs.
J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley. Flowers scarlet, tipped with purple.
Other Exhibits.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain), sent
Anemones, Pentstemons, and Lobelias and some new crested
Begonias. Fig. 77.
Mrs. Sydney Williams, Hindhead, Hazlemere, sent several
seedling Pelargoniums.
Mrs. Wingfield, Ampthill House (gr. Mr. Empson), sent
Codizum (Croton) interruptum elegans aureum.
From Mr. A. Smith, Lyminster, Arundel, came blooms of
Daturas.
Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth, sent two varieties of Chrysan-
themums.
Messrs. W. Cutbush & Son, Highgate, sent a group of Nerine
Fothergilli major.
Mr. R. Owen, Maidenhead, staged a group of Cannas.
Mr. W. Wells, Earlswood, Redhill, sent Chrysanthemum
‘Henri Yvon.’
Mr. J. K. Tranter, Henley-on-Thames, sent Dahlias.
Messrs. Dobbie & Co., Rothesay, sent French Marigolds.
From Messrs. Goos & Koenemann, Nieder-Walluf, came two
new and very promising varieties of Dahlias.
Mr. W. Green, Garforth, Leeds, sent a pink Lobelia.
Mr. T. Lowton, Ospringe House, Faversham, sent plants of
Primula obconica fimbriata. The Committee asked to see this
again.
From Mr. E. J. Reid, Beckenham, came three varieties of
Cannas.
Mr. EK. F. Such, Maidenhead, sent Cactus Dahlias.
elxil PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
FrLoraAL CoMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 8, 1897. ArT CHISWICK.
W. MarsHaLu, Esq., in the Chair, and five members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Highly Commended.
To hybrid sweet-scented leaf Pelargoniums :—
1. ‘W. Marshall.’ A very fine variety, of dense growth, with
finely cut foliage, and a blackish zone down the centre of each
segment.
2. °C. Jeffries.’ Plant of dwarf bushy habit; leaves broad,
the central portion heavily blotched with dark bronze.
3. ‘Richard Dean.’ Plant of dwarf bushy habit. The light
green much-divided leaves are beautifully crimped at the edges.
This would form a very useful table plant.
4. ‘George Stevens.’ A vigorous bushy grower, with large
deep green leaves crimped at the edges.
5. ‘H. B. May.’ Of tall, good habit, with large light green
pinnatifid leaves, each segment having in a young state a bronzy
zone, which disappears with age.
6. ‘J. D. Pawle.’ Tall, and of good habit, with broad green
pinnatifid leaves beautifully crimped at the edges.
These varieties were selected as being the best of a very large
number of seedlings raised at Chiswick by crossing P. crispum
with the more vigorous forms.
Also to the following annual Asters :—
(i.) Dwarf Victoria, bright rose tipped with white. (ii.)‘ Lilliput,’
rose. (iii.) Imbricated pompon crown, rose. (iv.) Imbricated
pompon, rose. (v.) ‘Mignon,’ white. (vi.) Giant Comet, ‘ The
Bride.’ (vii.) Dwarf Chrysanthemum, shining brick rose and
white. See page 299.
Commended.
To African Marigold ‘Lemon,’ and African Marigold
‘Orange.’
For descriptions, see Report on Annuals, page 299.
>> FLORAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 17. ~ elxiil
FrorAL CoMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 17, 1897. At CHISWICK.
W. MarsHact, Esq., in the Chair, and nine members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit. |
To Matricaria ‘Golden Ball.’ See page 305.
ae
ee es ao \
ft is ~
Sf
a
—
Y
Pe AN
fcr x
5
Fic. 77.—A CrestED Brconta. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
ine
clxiv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To early flowering Chrysanthemums. See page 287.
ae ‘L’Ami Condorcet.’ (ii.) ‘Longfellow.’ iii.) ‘Mychett
ite.’
Highly Commended.
To early flowering Chrysanthemums :—
(i.) ‘White St. Croats.’ (ii.) ‘ Madame Jolivart.’ — (iii.)
‘Madame Desgranges.’ (iv.) ‘Golden Fleece.’ (v.) ‘ Madame
Marie Masse.’ (vi.) ‘Little Bob.’ (vii.) ‘Mrs. Hawkins.’ (viii.)
‘G. Wermig.’ (ix.) ‘Strathmeath.’ (x.) ‘ Miss Davis.’ (xi.)
‘Mrs. Cullingford.’ (xii.) ‘Flora.’ (xiii.) ‘Mr. Selly.’ (xiv.)
‘Mrs. Burrell.’ (xv.) ‘Nanum.’ (xvi.) ‘Toreador.’ (xvii.)
‘Blushing Bride.’ (xviii.) ‘Canari.’ (xix.) ‘Piercy’s Seedling.’
(xx.) ‘Bronze Blushing Bride.’ (xxi.) ‘Madame Gastellier.’
(xxil.) ‘Edith Syratt.’ (xxiii.) ‘ Dodo.’ (xxiv.) ‘Madame
Louis Lionnet.’ (xxv.) ‘Anastasia.’ (xxvi.) ‘Petillant.’ (xxvii.)
‘Madame Eulalie Morel.’ (xxviii.) ‘ Salter’s Early Blush.’
Also to annual Asters :—
(i.) ‘Lilliput,’ white, rose centre. (ii.) ‘ Ball Jewel,’ scarlet
and copper. See page 299.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 21, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and sixteen members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. J. Burrell & Co., Cambridge, for a large group of
Gladioli and Cactus Dahlias.
Silver-gilt Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross, for a group of
Roses.
To Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for Cactus Dahlias.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Leopold de Rothschild, Esq., Gunnersbury House, Acton
(gr. Mr. J. Hudson), for a very fine group of Salvia splendens
grandiflora and a collection of Dahlias.
To Earl Percy, Syon House, Brentford (gr. Mr. G. Wythes),
FLORAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 21. elxv
for a group of Chrysanthemum ‘ Lady Fitzwigram,’ and Lilium
Harrisil.
To Mr. J. H. Witty, Nunhead Cemetery, for early flowering
Chrysanthemums.
To Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a collection of
Asters, Anemones, Tritomas, and Sunflowers.
To Mr. C. Turner, Slough, for Cactus and Pompon Dahhias.
To Messrs. H. Jones & Son, Shrewsbury, for Dahlias arranged
for effect.
To Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley, for Dahlas.
To Mr. S. Mortimer, Farnham, for Dahlias.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. H. Cannell & Sons, Swanley, for Dahlias.
To Mr. H. B. May, Upper Edmonton, for a group of Salvia
splendens grandiflora.
To Mr. J. T. West, Tower Hill, Brentwood, for Dahlias.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for hardy flowers.
To Messrs. J. Laing & Sons, Forest Hill, for foliage and
flowering plants.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Mr. E. Such, Maidenhead, for early flowering Chrys-
anthemums.
To Mr. G. Humphries, Kington Langley, Chippenham, for
Dahlias.
To Messrs. J. Peed & Sons, West Norwood, for Crotons,
Dracenas, Begonias, &c.
First Class Certificate.
To Apera arundinacea (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. J.
Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. A very ornamental grass, growing
about 2 feet in height, with small pale green leaves and loose,
slender, drooping plumes which measure about 3 feet 6 inches in
length.
To Retinospora obtusa sulphurea (votes, 6 for, 5 against),
from Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. A graceful variety of
vigorous habit, the young growths brightly yellow.
Award of Merit.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘Miss Finch’ (votes, unanimous), from
Q
elxvl PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons, Crawley. Large crimson flowers,
outer petals suffused with purple.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Mrs. John Goddard’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. J. Cheal & Sons. Large bright crimson-scarlet
flowers.
To Pompon Dahlia ‘ Maluma’ (votes, unanimous), from Mr.
C. Turner, Slough. A pretty variety, with deep yellow flowers.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Casilda’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
J. Burrell & Co., Cambridge. Sulphur-yellow flowers tipped
with orange.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Falka’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
J. Burrell & Co. A very handsome crimson-maroon variety.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Salmon Queen’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. J. Burrell & Co. Large salmon-pink flowers with
orange centre.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘Arachne’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Keynes, Williams & Co., Salisbury. A very distinct
variety ; white edged and suffused with orange-scarlet.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Laverstock Beauty’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Keynes, Williams & Co. Large dusky orange-.
salmon flowers.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘Mary Service’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Keynes, Williams & Co. A very handsome variety, with
long pointed petals, yellow ground, suffused and tipped with
reddish salmon.
To Cactus Dahlia ‘ Keynes’ White’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Keynes, Williams & Co. A very fine variety, with large
pure white flowers.
To Phlox ‘Miss Pemberton’ (votes, 9 for, 1 against), from
Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt. Plant of dwarf habit, very
free flowering; salmon-pink flowers in large trusses, crimson
eye.
To Crassula Cooperi (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Paul
& Son. .
SSS E=
SSS
Fic. 79.—EpmLa/ia x RADICO-PURPURATA. (Gardeners’ Chromecle.)
Cultural Commendation.
To T. B. Haywood, Esq., Woodhatch, Reigate (gr. Mr.
Salter), for Miitonia vexillaria ‘ Daisy Haywood,’ a large pure
white form previously certificated.
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. F, Sander & Co., St. Albans, showed Sobralia x
Veitchii, S. x Amesie, and other Orchids.
elxxil PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Fred Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr. Mr. T.
Stafford), showed Cattleya Mossi Wageneri, the white C. M.
Hardye, Lelia tenebrosa Charlesworthii, Lelio-Cattleya x
Arnoldiana, &e.
R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Iiodge, Camberwell (gr.
Mr. H. J. Chapman), sent Cypripedium leucochilum grandi-
florum, and C. x Salus, a hybrid of C. concolor, with greenish-
yellow flowers slightly tinged with lilac.
Mr. N. Blandford, Bitterne, Southampton, showed Cattleya
Warscewiczii with an almost entirely purple lip.
Mr. H. A. Tracey, Twickenham, sent flowers of fine forms
of Cattleya Mendelii.
_ The Rey. F. Paynter, Stoke Hill, Guildford, sent Phaius x
(Humblotii x bicolor), resembling a small P. x Cooksonii.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, JULY 13, 1897.
Harry J. Verrou, Esq., in the Chair, and twelve members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To Lelio-Cattleya x Canhamiana var. albida (L. purpurata x
C. Mossiz) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons,
Chelsea. Sepals and petals white, with a very faint pink tint.
Lip broad, the front of a dark crimson purple.
To Epidendrum nemorale (votes, 9 for), from Frau Ida
Brandt, Brunnenhof, Riesbach, Zurich (gr. Mr. Schlecht). A
fine inflorescence of the major form of this handsome old Mexican
species was shown.
To Phaius x Ashworthianus (Mannii x maculatus) (votes,
8 for), from Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans. A distinet
hybrid, with yellow flowers, slightly tinged with green; and with
conspicuous brown markings on the lip.
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons showed Lelio-Cattleya x Kunomia
(L. pumila x C. Gaskelliana), L.-C. x Zephyra (L. xanthina x
C. Mendelii), plants of Disa x Veitchi, &ce.
Frau Ida Brandt, Zurich, sent cut spikes of Epidendrum
ORCHID COMMITTEE, JULY 27. elxxili
Brassavole, E. radiatum, EH. atropurpureum Randii, Phalenopsis
violacea, Phaius Humblotii, Utricularia Endresii, &c.
Elijah Ashworth, Esq., Harefield Hall, Wilmslow, Cheshire
(gr. Mr. Holbrook), showed Cattleya x Mardelli, Cattleya
superba alba, C. Eldorado Wallisii, varieties of C. Warscewiczii,
and a flower of the blue-tinted Dendrobium ‘ Victoria Regina.’
IW
eS
Fic. 80.—Drnpvropium ‘ Victoria Regina.’ (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, showed Cypripedium x
‘Svend Bruun’ (Lowii x Curtisii), C. x ‘Mulus ’ (hirsutissimum x
Lawrenceanum), C. x orphanum, and C. x ‘ Euryale.’
ORCHID CoMMITTEE, JULY 27, 1897.
Harry J. Verrcou, Ksq., in the Chair, and thirteen members
. present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Elijah Ashworth, EKsq., Harefield Hall, Wilmslow,
clxxiv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Cheshire (gr. Mr. Holbrook), for a fine collection of cut spikes of
Cattleya Warscewiczii, C. Rex, and C. Mendelii.
First Class Certificate.
To Epilelia x radico-purpurata (Epidendrum radicans ¢
Lelia purpurata 2?) (votes, 8 for, 3 against), from Messrs. Jas.
Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. A most remarkable hybrid, showing
the peculiarity of having the habit of growth and other features
of the pollen parent, as previously remarked in instances where
Epidendrum radicans has been the male. The inflorescence
bore three flowers, two abnormal and one perfect. Sepals
lanceolate, petals ovate acute, both of a light orange-scarlet ;
lip broadly ovate, obscurely three-lobed, yellow at the base, outer
portion light reddish-purple. Fig. 79.
Award of Merit.
To Cattleya Warscewiczii ‘Mrs. E. Ashworth’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Elijah Ashworth, Esq., Harefield Hall, Wilmslow,
Cheshire. A very distinct and pretty variety, with blush-white
flowers, showing no other colour than a yellow tinge at the base
of the lip, and a minute rose-purple blotch at its apex.
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons showed a small group of hybrid
Orchids, among which were Phalenopsis x ‘ Hebe’ (Sanderiana x
rosea), Lelio-Cattleya x pees Cattleya x ‘Atlanta,’ and
Sobralia x Veitchii.
Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, showed specimens of
Cattleya Warscewiczii, C. Gaskelliana ‘Sunray,’ Bulbophyllum
species, and hybrid Cypripediums.
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, showed Angreecum
Kichlerianum, Miltonia vexillaria rubella melanocentra, Vanda
Hookeriana, and Masdevallia Gargantua.
Frau Ida Brandt, Riesbach, Zurich (gr. Mr. Schlecht), sent
an interesting collection of Orchids.
J. H. Kitson, Esq., Elmet Hall, Leeds (gr. Mr. Bonsall),
showed Cypripedium leucochilum.
Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park, Sunningdale (gr. Mr. Fred J.
Thorne), showed varieties of Odontoglossum Schlieperianum and
O. aspidorhinum.
J. F. Ebner, Esq., Beckenham (gr. Mr. A. Waite), sent
Cypripedium x Chapmanii (bellatulum x Curtisii).
“
-
q
ORCHID COMMITTEE, AUGUST 10.- elxxv
OrcHID CoMMITTEE, AuUGusT 10, 1897.
Harry J. VErtcH, Esq., in the Chair, and sixteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for a group of
Cattleyas, Odontoglossums, «e.
Award of Merit.
To Odontoglossum Pescatorei Harrisianum (votes, 7 for, 1
against), from Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea. The
plant bore a fine branched spike of white flowers, spotted on the
sepals and petals with purple.
To Lelio-Cattleya x elegans var. Schroderiana (votes, 9 for,
5 against), from Elijah Ashworth, Esq., Harefield Hall, Wilms-
low, Cheshire (gr. Mr. Holbrook). One of the darkest in colour
of any of the L.-C.xelegans Turneri class. Flowers almost
wholly dark crimson-purple, the lip brighter in tint than the
other segments.
To Dendrobium ‘ Victoria Regina’ (votes, unanimous), from
Thomas Statter, Esq., Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester (gr.
Mr. R. Johnson). Flowers about 1 inchacross, the outer halves
of the segments purplish-blue, the remainder white. Bearing
some resemblance to D. sanguinolentum, though quite distinct
from it. Fig. 80.
To Cypripedium x callo-Rothschildianum (callosum x Roth-
schildianum) (votes, 8 for, 4 against), from J. Gurney Fowler,
Esq., Glebelands, South Woodford (gr. Mr. Davis). A fine
hybrid, with a general resemblance to C. x Massaianum, which
was also shown.
Cultural Commendation.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr.
W. H. White), for a splendid plant of Platyclinis filiformis, with
ninety-four flower spikes.
Botanical Certificate.
To Epidendrum (Nanodes) Matthewsi, from Sir Trevor
Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. W. H. White).
elxxvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
e.
Rh,
Tet
s
Xe
te
we
_
id
&
#
~ 2
S
=
é
aay
V
Fic. 81.—-GRAMMATOPHYLLUM sPECIOsUM. (Gardeners’ Magazine.)
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, sent an interesting
group of Orchids.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr.
W. H. White), showed Masdevallia infracta purpurea, with many
flowers ; and the rare Eulophia guineensis.
Sir Frederick Wigan, Clare Lawn, East Sheen (gr. Mr.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, AUGUST 24, elxxvii
W. H. Young), sent several spikes of Lelio-Cattleya x elegans
cut from the same plant; spikes of Lelia crispa and Masdevallia
macrura.
J. Gurney Fowler, Esq., Glebelands, South Woodford (gr.
Mr. Davis), showed Cypripedium x Massaianum, C.x‘A. de
Lairesse, and C.x‘ Neptune,’ for comparison with C. x callo-
Rothschildianum, they being of the same class; also Renanthera
Storiei.
G. W. Law-Schofield, Esq., New-Hall-Hey, Rawtenstall
(gr. Mr. Shill), sent a distinct light form of Lelio-Cattleya x
elegans.
W. H. Lumsden, Esq., Balmedie, Aberdeenshire (gr. Mr.
Roberts), sent a Cypripedium reputed to be between C. Stonei
and C. Fairieanum, but which bore a strong resemblance to C.
Stonei, and no trace of C. Fairieanum, though evidently a
hybrid, but not of the parentage recorded.
R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge, Flodden Road,
Camberwell (gr. Mr. H. J. Chapman), showed a good form of
Lelio-Cattleya x Andreana (L.-C. x elegans x C. bicolor).
Reginald Young, Esq., Sefton Park, Liverpool (gr. Mr.
Poyntz), sent Cypripedium x Kyermanianum var. ‘ Hermione.’
Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons showed Leelio-Cattleya x
callistoglossa ignescens, and two distinct forms of L.-C. x
‘ Clonia.’
OrcHID ComMITTEE, AuaustT 24, 1897.
Harry J. VertcH, Esq., in the Chair, and eleven members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Gold Medal.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr.
W. H. White), for a magnificent example of Grammatophyllum
speciosum, the flower spike being over 7 feet in length. It was
the first specimen ever shown. Flowers dull yellow, thickly
dotted with reddish-purple spots. Figs. 81 and 82.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for an effective
group of Orchids.
clxxvVili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
First Class Certificate.
To Grammatophyllum speciosum (votes, unanimous), from
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. W, H, White). Figs. 81, 82.
! i" \
hy Ay M| \, rY
A, MY
iy. )
\
I i
— | byl : If
bal EGS a gee
‘( Daal ee)
il oat ’ y
4
( liv ’ \\ \i
TMM . ¥ ‘ ef }
gh te titd
yk ean
\
‘Nh
vy \\
1
\
\
| j My on
sat ih . h Hi)
vl \ | /
wT
——
SES
Fig. 82.—GRAMMATOPHYLLUM sPECIOSUM—Basal flower, male. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
ORCHID COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 7. elxxix
Award of Merit.
To Lelio-Cattleya x ‘ Juno’ (C. Mossiz x L. majalis) (votes,
unanimous), from Norman C. Cookson, Esq., Oakwood, Wylam,
Northumberland (gr. Mr. W. Murray). A singular hybrid, with
pale rose-lilac flowers ; the base of the lip cream white, marked
with yellow.
To Goodyera Rollissonii (votes, unanimous), from Mr. William
Bull, King’s Road, Chelsea. An old but rare variety with olive-
green leaves, variegated with golden yellow.
To Lelio-Cattleya x Andreana (L.-C. x elegans x C. bicolor)
(votes, unanimous), from R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge
Lodge, Camberwell (gr. Mr. H. J. Chapman). A singular
hybrid, with pale rose sepals and petals, and elongated purple
lip.
Other Exhibits.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming (gr. Mr.
T. W. Bond), showed Leelio-Cattleya x‘ Radiance’ (L. purpurata
var. x C. Dowiana); L.-C. x‘ Ruby Gem’ (C. Lawrenceana x
L.-C. xelegans); and Cypripedium x gracile (Haynaldianum x
Swanianum).
Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, showed hybrid Orchids.
Messrs. F’. Sander & Co., St. Alban’s, sent Lelio-Cattleya x
Sanderex, L.-C. x‘ Robin Measures,’ and other Lelio-Cattleyas.
R. I. Measures, Esq. (gr. Mr. H. J. Chapman) showed
Masdevallia trinema (Lowii).
ORCHID COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 7, 1897.
Harry J. Vertcn, Ksq., in the Chair, and eleven members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. James Veitch & Sons, Chelsea, for a very fine
group of Orchids, remarkable by the presence of a large number
of hybrid Cattleyas and Leelia-Cattleyas.
To Fred Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr.
Mr. T. Stafford), for a small group of rare Orchids.
elxxx PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
First Class Certificate.
To Cattleya x ‘ Euphrasia ’ (superba ¢ Warscewiczii p ) (votes,
unanimous), from Messrs. James Veitch & Sons. A remarkably
fine hybrid with well-formed flowers, of good substance, and of
a rich rose-purple colour, the front lobe of the lip being of the
intense purplish crimson seen in the best forms of C. Warscewiczii.
Fic, 83.—La=.ia pumma ‘Garton Park’ variety. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Award of Merit.
To Rhyncostylis ceelestis, ‘Cambridge Lodge’ variety (votes,
unanimous), from R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge,
Camberwell. A very distinct variety, with dark violet labellum,
and lighter violet markings on the tips of the other segments.
Botanical Certificate.
To Brassia Lawrenceana longissima, from Messrs, James
Veitch & Sons.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 9. elxxxi
To Acineta Barkeri, from Major Joicey, Sunningdale Park,
Sunningdale, Berks (gr. Mr. Fred. J. Thorne).
To Oncidium panduratum, Rolfe, from Welbore S. Ellis, Esq.
Hazelbourne, Dorking (gr. Mr. 8. Barrell).
AW
ne
i »
MINH
A
i hy I
: y
!
S W\\ }
\ AN) I
=—=—
Fa — = — ~
eS
A\ \\
AN \\ \y }
\ Woo .
\\ \\
\\
Fic. 84.—Vanpa ama@na. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.) -.
Other Exhibits.
hos. Statter, Esq., Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester
(gr. Mr. R. Johnson), showed Cypripedium x triumphans
R
clxxxii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
(Sallieri Hyeanum x cenanthum superbum), C. x ‘Lady
Isobel’ (Rothschildianum x Stonei), and C. x ‘Lord Derby’
(Rothschildianum x superbiens).
Messrs. F. Sander & Co. showed hybrid Cypripediums
Maxillaria striata, &ec.
Mrs. Harris, Lamberhurst (gr. Mr. 8. Huggins), showed
Cattleya x‘ Miss Harris’ (Mossi x Schilleriana).
Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, sent Cattleya x‘ Minucia’
(Loddigesii x Warscewiczii), Cypripedium x ‘ Alfred Hollington,’
and other Cypripediums.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming (gr. Mr.
T. W. Bond), showed Lelia x splendens (crispa x purpurata),
interesting as demonstrating that this cross did not obtain
L.-C. x Exoniensis, to which it is very inferior. Also L.-C. x
Andreana (C. bicolor x L.-C.xelegans Turneri) as L.-C. x
‘ Gazelle.’
A. W. Warburton, Esq., Vine House, Haslingden, Manchester
(gr. Mr. T. Lofthouse), showed Cypripedium insigne ‘ Laura
Kimball,’ a fine yellow form near to C. insigne Sanderianum.
Messrs. James Veitch & Sons showed Cattleya x
‘Melpomene’ (Mendelii ¢ Forbesii 2).
OrcHID CoMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 21, 1897.
Harry J. Vertcu, Esq., in the Chair, and eleven members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton, for an effective group
of Orchids.
First Class Certificate.
To Lelia pumila ‘Gatton Park’ variety (votes, unani-
mous), from Jeremiah Colman, Esq., Gatton Park, Surrey
(gr. Mr. King). A peculiar variety with white flowers, the
sepals and petals of which were suffused with a decided blue
tint. Front of the lip purplish blue. Fig. 83.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 21. elxxxill
Award of Merit.
To Vanda xamcena (nat. hyb. V. Roxburghii x V. ccrulea)
(votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Linden, |’ Horticulture Inter-
Fic. 85.—Lycastre DENNINGIANA. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
~
clxxxiv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
nationale, Brussels. Flowers intermediate between those of the
supposed parents. Sepals and petals of a peculiar light greyish-
blue, with numerous violet spots, lip violet-blue. Fig. 84.
To Miltonia x Peetersiana (votes, 6 for, 4 against), from
R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge, Camberwell (gr. Mr.
H. J. Chapman). The original record supposed this to be
between M. spectabilis Moreliana and M. Clowesii. The plant
shown was evidently M. Regnelli x M. spectabilis Moreliana.
Flowers light purple, the lip being formed as in M. Regnelli.
To Lycaste Denningiana (votes, unanimous), from the Royal
Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, Dublin. Flowers of the L. gigantea
class. Sepals and petals yellowish-green ; lip large, reddish
orange. Fig. 85.
To Oncidium Papilio (votes, unanimous), from D. M. Grims- |
dale, Ksq., Kent Lodge, Uxbridge.
To Cattleya x Hardyana Lowie (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. Hugh Low & Co., Clapton. A large, well-formed, and
richly coloured variety.
Other Exhibits. :
W. 5S. McMillan, Esq., Ardenholme, Maghull, Liverpool (gr. |
Mr. W. G. Robertson), sent Cattleya x Hardyana alba, with |
white sepals and petals and purple-crimson lip veined with
orange. The Committee considered it similar to C. aurea ‘ Mrs.
Fred Hardy.’
Messrs. Collins & Collins, Cumberland Park, Willesden,
sent Odontoglossum Pescatorei and one plant of O. x excellens.
Sir Frederick Wigan, Clare Lawn, Hast Sheen (gr. Mr.
W.H. Young), sent Houlletia Brocklehurstiana.
Messrs. F. Sander & Co., St. Albans, staged a small group of
Orchids, in which were good examples of Dendrobium Griffithia-
num, D. Gratrixianum, with a single white flower tinged with |
purple on the lip; Miltonia x Lamarcheana, M. Bluntii
Lubbersiana, Cypripedium bellatulum album, Cypripedium x :
Saundersianum, Odontoglossum grande, «c.
EXTRACTS FROM THE PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
GENERAL MEETING.
OcToBER 12, 1897.
Mr. Harry J. Vertca, F.L.S., in the Chair.
Fellows elected (23).—H. T. Armitage, J. R. St. Barbe Baker,
Mrs. D. Bartholomew, John Bentley, junr., H. Dunkin, H. F.
Getting, Henry A. Hebeler, Mrs. Heldmann, Rev. J. J. John-
stone, Lady Evelyn Mason, Henry J. Morison, Joseph M. Moore,
Mrs. Parr, C. W. Payne, W. Potten, T. Russell, B.A., Mrs.
Swinley, W. Sydenham, J. Vert, Miss Eunice Watts, John
Williams, Mrs. Wrigley, H. Pasteur.
A lecture on “Some Curiosities of Orchid Breeding’”’ was
given by Mr. C. C. Hurst. (See p. 442.)
JENERAL MEETING.
OcToBER 26, 1897.
Sir TREvor LAWRENCE, Bart., in the Chair.
Fellows elected (4).—John C. Colvill, Alfred EK. Leggett
Walter Speed, C. Aubrey Watts.
The lecture announced for this meeting was postponed, and
instead thereof, at 8 o’clock, the Victoria Medal of Honour, con-
ferred by the Council in celebration of Her Majesty’s Diamond
Jubilee, was distributed to the sixty recipients by the President.
(See p. 571.)
U
clxxxvVi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
GENERAL MEETING.
NovEMBER 9, 1897.
Dr. Maxwetu T. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair.
Fellows elected (15).—Dr. Geo. Brodie, J. T. Campbell, J.P.,
Percy R. Dunn, Mrs. Arnold Herbert, Alfred A. Honey, James ©
Jeffrey, Arthur G. Kendall, Mrs. Lumsden, Mrs. Brough Maltby,
Charles Moon, J. C. Newsham, Hon. Mrs. Oakley, Lady D’Arcy
Osborne, Lady de Ramsey, Miss Dorothy Renshaw.
A lecture on “ Root Action,’ illustrated by lantern slides,
was given by Professor F. W. Oliver, D.Sc., F.L.8. (See p. 486.)
‘GENERAL MEETING.
NOVEMBER 23, 1897.
Mr. JAMES Dovuatas in the Chair.
Fellows elected (22).— Leonard Addenbrooke, William
Wheatley Ball, Alfred Barker, J. Brice Bell, C. W. Bonynge,
Charles E. Bretherton, George Elliott, Miss E. Helen Emett,
Fred Enock, R. Munro Ferguson, William Garton, junr., Mrs.
Henry Jackson, Mrs. Kemeys-Tynte, Mrs. Kerrison, Mrs. J. E.
Lascelles, R. 8. Markendale, Alex. McLanchlin, Robt. Windsor
Rickards, Countess of Selkirk, Mrs. Sheward, G. N. Stevens,
Mrs. H. Yool. :
A lecture on ‘‘ Horticultural Exhibitions and Schedules” was
given by Mr. John Wright, V.M.H. (See p. 499.)
GENERAL MEETING.
DECEMBER 14, 1897.
Mr. CuHas. E. PEARSON in the Chair.
Feilows elected (24).—T. Arnold, W. E. Austin, G. Shorland
Ball, Mrs. C. Brandreth, William Thackhall Browett, Thomas L.
Butler, Charles H. Cave, D. Livingstone Davies, James A.
Gammie, Dowager Duchess of Kintore, Robert Maher, Miss
Moon, Viscountess Newport, F. F. Paul, Charles Phillips,
Richard Pryce, John Rutherford, M.P., Frank Thomas, W. F,
SCLENTIFIC COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 12. elxxxvli
Thomas, Mrs. W. F. Thomas, H. J. Griftin, Major Weller,
William Whitaker-Standing, HE. Money Wigram.
A lecture on “ Sporting in Chrysanthemums ”’ was given by
the Rev. Professor Henslow, M.A., V.M.H. (See p. 587).
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE.
OcTOBER 12.
Dr. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair, and four members present.
Acorn Cups malformed.—Mr. French, of Felstead, sent spe-
cimens of this not uncommon phenomenon. It appears to be
due to an arrest of the flower, probably by some insect attack,
when the scales of the cup become enlarged and free, as in the
Artichoke gall.
Melons with new Disease.—Specimens were received from
Mr. J. Fraser Smith, of The Gardens, Cullen House, N.B., who
writes as follows :—‘‘ The disease attacked my crop last year, and
has again this, in both a sudden and deadly manner. An entire
crop of twenty plants has perished in a few days. The disease
first shows a spot on the leaf, then a part of the stem gets
affected, and in two or three days the whole plant collapses. It
is only at a certain time of the year, for the first crop in both
years, which was grown in the same house, finished without any
signs of it, 7.e. about the early part of August ; while the second
crop, about half-grown on the opposite side of the path, has all
gone, as also a later batch planted on the same side as the first
ones. Out of thirteen plants ten went off in one day. Two
young Cucumber plants have also died in the same way, after
they were four feet high.” The following report has been
received from Kew :—‘ The Melon disease is caused by Scoleco-
trichum melophthorum, Prill., a parasitic fungus. The disease
is common in France, but I am not aware of its having pre-
viously been observed in Britain. Burn all diseased plants, as if
they be allowed to rot on the ground a recurrence of the disease
would be almost certain next season. Under any circumstances
it would be advisable not to use the same ground for Melon-
growing for at least two years, as the fungus spores are probably
abundant in the soil.”
u 2
clxxxvViill PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Parrot Tulips Seeding.—Mr. Wilks brought ripe pods and
seeds of this variety, which he had crossed with the pollen from
other kinds of Tulips growing in his garden. It had been
stated by growers that the Parrot Tulip had not been known
to bear seed at all, and Mr. Henslow observed that of some
bulbs received from Mr. Barr, in every case the pistil was
abortive. It is proposed to raise plants from the seed thus
obtained. |
Abies bracteata Cones.—Fine specimens were received from
Mr. A. Harding, The Gardens, Orton Longueville, Peterborough.
They were borne by one of the finest specimens of this species in
England. The tree is a native of South California, growing in
Santa Lucia, and isin danger of becoming extinct. The cones
are remarkable for their long linear bracts.
Cedrela Toona fasciated.—A remarkable specimen, con-
sisting of a spirally coiled, flattened branch, two of the coils
being welded together, was exhibited by Dr. Masters. The
specimen came from Dr. Franceschi, Santa Barbara, South
California.
Abies balsamea.—A specimen was received from Mr. Noble
of a young plant which had developed a globular tuber-like
excrescence below the soil. Similar cases had occurred some
years ago in the same grounds, but the cause is not traceable in
the present stage of growth, though it may possibly be due to
some injury by insects at a very early stage.
Juniper Berries gymnospermous.— Dr. Masters exhibited some
berries of the common Juniper, received from Dr. Schréter, of
Zurich, remarkable for the three coherent bracts not having
become fleshy enough to close in upon the seeds, so that the
latter remained visible, free, and strictly ‘‘ gymnospermous,”’ as
in the previous condition of the ovules.
Trapa natans, Frwt.—He also showed specimens of the
Water Chestnut from the Lago di Muzzano, near Lugano, having
four knobs upon them, which do not occur on the ordinary form
of this fruit. Specimens of another variety, var. Verbanensis,
were shown from the Lago Maggiore.
Spruce Fir-cone, var.—He also showed cones of a variety of
Picea excelsa having smooth-rounded scales, instead of the
usual form. Dr. Schréter, who gathered it in Switzerland,
referred it to Picea medioxima; but Dr. Masters observed that
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 26, elxxxix
this variety is a dwarf alpine or arctic species, and regarded the
specimen as a variety only of the Spruce.
Anthurium Spathe, Monstrows.—Colonel Beddome sent a
specimen having three spathes, and the spadix commencing to
branch, exhibiting a semi-proliferous condition.
Plants exhibited.—M. Lemoine sent a spray of Tamarix
kashgarica, a variety of T. hispida, interesting as being a late-
flowering species from Central Asia; Panaz sessiliflorwm, with
large, dense bunches of black berries, probably from Japan; a
sweet-scented Begonia having a delicate but very evanescent
odour of lemon; and double and semi-double sports of B.
semperfiorens.
Galls on Roots of Oak.—Mr. Wilks brought remarkable galls
forming a large mass on the roots of Oak or Chestnut. They
are also found on the roots of the Deodar. The galls are poly-
gonal and wedge-like, so forming together a globular cluster
about the root. They are produced by Cynips aptera. (See
Gardeners’ Chronicle, 1841, p. 732, and 1874.)
ScIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, OcTOBER &6, 1897.
Dr, Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair, and seven members present.
Galls on Oak FRoots.~—With reference to the specimens
exhibited at the last meeting, Mr. McLachlan observed that
the name of the insect was now Biorhiza aptera, and that only
one sex (the female) was known as occurring in the root-galls.
As soon as it was hatched, the insect climbed to the terminal
shoots and laid its eggs inthebuds. The result was the common
spongy gall, known as the Oak-apple. In this both male and
female insects were produced, and were formerly thought to be a
distinct genus, under the name of Teras terminalis. Both sexes
fly down to the foot of the Oak and lay their eggs in the roots
underground, and so reproduce the root-galls. This dimorphism
is characteristic of other gall-insects on the Oak.
Sub-pelorian Cattleyas.—Mr. Veitch exhibited two sprays,
carrying several flowers of Cattleya labiata autwmnalis, having
the two front sepals assuming the form of lips. He observed
that the same plant had repeated the peculiarity both last year
and this, but the lip-markings are now more pronounced. ‘The
Cxe PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
specimens were received from Mr. Frank Lloyd, of Coombe
House, near Croydon.
Carnation Leaves malformed.—Mr. Douglas exhibited leaves
with peculiar horn-like excrescences on the margins. It was
suggested that they might be caused by acari. They were
forwarded to Dr. Michael for investigation. Dr. Masters observed
that a Yucca in the Botanic Gardens, Dublin, produced very
similar structures every year.
Malformed Cauliflower.—Mr. Henslow exhibited a stalk
bearing a cluster of short Asparagus-like shoots, the leaves being
reduced to a bracteate form, suggestive of the name of Broccoli—
viz. Brassica oleracea var. Botrytis asparagoides. Dr. Masters
observed that it bore a very unusual appearance, really inter-
mediate between a Cauliflower and a Wild Cabbage.
ScIENTIFIC CoMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9, 1897.
Dr. Masters, F.R.§S., in the Chair, and five members present.
Cattleya labiata, Sport.—Dr. Masters observed that sports
similar to those produced at the last meeting, in which two
sepals were more or less resembling the labellum, had been
sent to him from numerous localities this year. The species
was introduced some fifty years ago, and subsequently lost;
but it had been lately rediscovered in and introduced from
Pernambuco.
Carnation Leaves with Horn-like Marginal Outgrowths.—
Mr. Michael reported that no trace of acari could be seen, as
suggested as a possible cause. Dr. Miller observed that a plant
of Solanwm jasminoides was covered all over with horn-like
excrescences. Dr. Masters suggested that they were probably
spongy outgrowths from the epidermis.
Stocks, &c., attacked by Beetles.—-Mr. Michael observed
that Stocks, Virginia Stocks, and Nasturtiums in his garden
were attacked and utterly spoilt in a fortnight by thousands
of beetles eating the flowers of the two former plants, but
the leaves as well of the last named. They do not entirely
kill the plants, which renew both leaves and flowers after the
beetles have disappeared. A partial remedy was found in
shaking the plants over a basin of hot water. It appears to
.
;
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9. CXCl
be Phyllotreta atra, one of the numerous “ flea-beetles.”’
Miss Ormerod, to whom they were sent, suggests ‘trying a
mixture of equal parts of fresh gas-lime and quicklime, with
a much smaller proportion of soot, and about half as much
sulphur as of soot. These should be powdered up together very
finely, well mixed, and dusted on to the foliage when the dew is
on it, morning or evening. Just a sprinkling is enough. It
usually acts well if applied as above so as to adhere to the
beetles and foliage.’”” She was under the impression, however,
‘that lime similarly applied would do equally well.”’
Ivy attacked by Dodder.—Mr. Chas. Herrin, of Dropmore,
sent specimens of Ivy badly attacked by a Cuscuta europea. He
remarks: ‘This parasite has established itself on the west
wall of our church, destroying the Ivy with which it is covered.
It has been thoroughly destroyed, Ivy and all, once, a few years
ago; but now that the Ivy has begun to grow nicely again, half
covering the wall, it has again appeared, and is destroying it.”’
As the seeds must germinate in the ground, or perhaps in the
chinks in the wall as well, the aim must be to kill them before
germinating. If the ground by the wall received a good dressing
of slaked lime, it might prove effective.
Cox’s Orange Apple striped.—Mr. G. Swailes, of Beverley
sent an Apple, mostly red, but striped with green on one side,
the green colour being on the most exposed side. The cause was
unknown. Dr. Masters suggested the possibility of accidental
crossing having been the cause, for Darwin had described similar
results in an Orange pollinated bya Lemon. (An. and Pl. under
Dom. i. p. 399.) Mr. Wilks mentioned that a Beurré d’Amanlis
Pear in his garden had thrown out a green striped sport, also a
bough bearing golden foliage.
Gall on Jasamine.—My. Henslow exhibited a large globular
gall which he had taken from the stem of this plant. As
no fungus was present, it was sent to Mr. McLachlan for
examination.
Composition of Potatos.—Professor Church gave some account
of the recent researches of MM. Coudon and Bussard on the
distribution of the constituents in Potatos. They found thai a
slice of a Potato revealed three zones. The external one beneath
the epidermis contained 73 per cent. of water, the central holding
about 80 to 84 per cent.; that the central part contained the
Cx¢ll PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
greater amount of nitrogen, the exterior the greater quantity of )
starch. This accounted for the ‘‘ bursting’’ in a floury Potato,
which is relatively more free from albuminoid matters. The
cause of the interior portion being more consistent is that the
starch cells though bursting are held together by the curdling of
the albuminoid matters during cooking. Thesame peculiarities
appear in the thirty-four varieties examined. The intermediate
zone was also of an intermediate character with regard to its
structure and cell-contents. It was to be regretted that the
authors did not distinguish between the true albuminoids and
the.amides in estimating their percentage of nitrogenous matter.
As a rule, the former amount to 1°3 in Potatos, but they had
estimated them from the total nitrogen as from 1°8 to 2°5. Dr.
Masters remarked that these observations corresponded with the
stem-structure of the Potato, in which the cortex was a starch-
reservoir as it is in trees, while the deeper layers correspond with
the phloem or proteid-holding sieve-tubes.
ScIENTIFIC CoMMITTEE, NOVEMBER, 23, 1897.
Dr. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair, and three members present.
Gall on Jasmine.—With reference to the specimen brought
by the Secretary to the last meeting, Mr. MacLachlan reports
that it is quite impossible to fix on anything in particular in the
way of a cause, but the puncture of a Phytoptus is the most
probable.
Phyllotreta on Crucifere.—He alsv observed, with regard to
the beetles shown by Mr. Michael as destructive to Stocks, &c.,
that ‘‘ the genus is the one to which the ‘ Turnip-flea’ belongs.
There are about adozen species in this country, all being much
alike. They all frequent the Crucifere, and the fact that this
one was also found on Troprolum only intensifies the fact that
most things which feed on the former will also feed on the latter,
as, é.g., the larve of ‘Cabbage whites,’ the interpretation being
that both contain the same chemical vegetable products.”
Dahlia, Hybrid (?).—Flowers were received from EK. J.
Lowe, Esq., of Shirenewton Hall, Chepstow, supposed to be the
result of crossing a Dahlia with the pollen of a Sunflower. The
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, DECEMBER 14. excell
appearance was that of a Dahlia, the disc alone being rather
larger. Dr. Masters undertook to examine them more minutely.
Monstrous Cypripediwm.—Mr. Veitch sent a plant of C.
sitius bearing a single flower. It had no lip, but two columns.
It was referred to Dr. Masters for further investigation.
The Copper-plant.—Dr. Masters exhibited an illustration of
Polycarpea spirostylis, F. von Mueller. It has the above name,
as itis said only to grow where copper is to be found, and that
its presence is an indication to miners of the existence of that
metal in the neighbourhood. It is found by the mines of
Watsonville, &c., N. Queensland.
Proliferous Chrysanthemum.—A specimen bearing three
flowers was received from B. Greaves, Esq., of Broome Hall,
Dorking. They were remarkable for consisting of a dense mass
of minute heads instead of distinct florets. Some of the show
Chrysanthemums, Dr. Masters observed, consisted of this
peculiarity, the separate heads combining to make a single large
‘‘flower.”” The peculiarity is characteristic of the genus
Kchinops, only the individual heads contain but a single flower
each.
SCIENTIFIC CoMMITTEE, DECEMBER 14, 1897.
Dr. Masters, F.R.S., in the Chair, and five members present.
Cypripedium, Monstrous.—With reference to the specimen
sent to the last meeting by Mr. Veitch, Dr. Masters reported that
the lip was wanting, but the dorsal and ventral sepals as well as
the lateral petals were normal; both stamens were present, but
only two carpels, standing in an antero-posterior position.
Tuberous Growths on Vines.—Mr. 8. T. Wright sent some
gall-like structures taken from Vines in the large vinery at
Chiswick. He observes that “many of the old and young rods
are similarly malformed at their base. It does not appear to
affect the health and vigour of the rods. In all the malforma-
tions grubs or maggots are present; but neither moths nor
weevils have been seen in the house.”” Mr. Michael pronounced
the grubs to be coleopterous, but they were not likely to have
been the cause. Professor Church undertook to examine them
chemically. There was no apparent structure in them beyond a -
mass of cellular tissue with a corky exterior surface.
CXC1V PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Hellebores diseased.—Some badly diseased plants were
received from Mr. F. W. Burbidge, Botanic Gardens, Dublin.
They were submitted to Kew for examination. The report was
as follows :—‘ Phoma effusa, Desm., is the name of the fungus
attacking the Hellebores. The diseased portions should be
removed and burned, as at this season the fungus is producing
myriads of spores, which live as saprophytes on humus in the
soil for some time before they are capable of acting as parasites.
The Hellebore shoots of next year will be infected by these
spores. The above alternation from a parasitic to a saprophytic
mode of life enables the fungus possessing one form of fruit only,
as in the present instance, to tide over the period during which
its host-plant is not actively growing. Spraying with a solution
of potassium sulphide (1 oz. to 3 gal. of water) when the leaves
first appear next season would, to some extent, prevent the
chances of inoculation from floating spores.”
Holly with Red and Yellow Berries—Myr. Ch. Turner,
Slough, sent some sprays, on which he remarks: ‘‘ They are cut
from a large tree which retains its berries for two years. The
berries are yellow in the first year, but change to red in the
second year.’’ As no seasonable break was distinguishable
between the group of yellow and that of the red berries below it
on the same stem, some doubt was expressed, and some further
information desired. This Mr. Turner has kindly promised to
furnish.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE.
Fruit AND VEGETABLE CoMMITTEE, OcTOBER 12, 1897.
Puiuie Crowxey, Ksq., in the Chair, and twenty members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Gold Medal.
To Roger Leigh, Esq., Barham Court, Maidstone (gr. Mr.
Woodward), for a magnificent exhibit of 100 dishes of Apples and
Pears.
Silver Knightian Medal.
To John Warren, Esq., Handeross Park, Crawley (gr. Mr.
Offer), for sixty dishes of Apples and Pears.
CXCV
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 12.
9484
(‘awzvbopy svouapsn4y)
(TAUUH SUNVE, AIddY—'GZL ‘Oly
"=a. ee
CXCVi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. .
To Messrs. Carter, High Holborn, for a very instructive .
exhibit of varieties of Cabbage.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Lord St. Oswald, Nostell Priory, Wakefield (gr. Mr. John
Easter), for a collection of Apples, showing how well they can
be grown, with care, even in a smoke-laden atmosphere.
To the Dowager Lady Freake, Fulwell Park, Twickenham
(gr. Mr. Rickwood), for a collection of Apples and Pears.
Bronze Kmghtian Medal.
To A. Young & Co., Stevenage, for Ornamental Gourds.
Award of Merit.
To Melon ‘ Croxteth Jubilee’ (votes, 7 for, 3 against), from
Lord Sefton (gr. Mr. Barham), Croxteth Park, Liverpool.
Fruit of excellent flavour; slightly oval; skin yellow, slightly
netted, deeply ribbed ; flesh scarlet.
To Pear ‘ Directeur Hardy’ (votes, 10 for, 1 against), from
Messrs. Geo. Bunyard, Maidstone. [Fruit of excellent flavour,
somewhat suggestive of ‘Chaumontel’; bluntly pyriform (peg-
top shaped) ; short stalk with no depression; very small eye in
very slight depression ; skin brown and rough, with a red tinge
on the sunny side. Tree of rigid growth and very fruitful.
To Apple ‘James Grieve’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Geo. Bunyard, Maidstone. Fruit full of flavour, very tender
and soft and juicy; small eye somewhat depressed ; long slender
stalk deeply inserted; skin pale yellow brightly flecked with
crimson. ‘The tree is said to be a very good and early cropper,
and the fruit keeps well when ripe. It was raised from Cox’s
Orange by Messrs. Dickson, of Edinburgh. (Fig. 125.)
Other Exhibits.
Mr. Roger, Lodsworth, Sussex, sent a very pretty seedling
Apple which did not, however, seem to belong to either the
cooking or eating section.
Mr. I’. Norman, Benge Hill, Evesham, sent a seedling Apple
which was too like Fearn’s Pippin.
Mr. W. Pridmore, Hinckley, sent two seedling Apples, neither
of which seemed of sufficient merit.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 26, CXCVI1i
F. Graham Powell, Esq., Swanley, sent specimens of Bottle
Fruit of excellent appearance.
E. Lord, Esq., Rawtenstall (gr. Mr. Wright), sent a supposed
seedling Grape, having large bunches with very large long oval
berries, each berry being almost green at the stalk end and
passing gradually to almost black at the point. It was considered
to be so like to ‘Black Morocco’ as to be practically indis-
tinguishable from it.
Mr. B. Wells, Crawley, sent Apple ‘ Nouvelle France,’ which,
if it keeps well, was considered promising as a dessert Apple. In
appearance it is like a highly coloured Lane’s ‘ Prince Albert,’
but with a shorter and more deeply inserted stalk. The flesh is,
however, tenderer and whiter, and the flavour quite distinct. It
was requested to be sent in December.
W. Lawrence, Esq., Elsfield, Hollingbourne (gr. Mr. Robinson),
sent some very fine ‘ Hill’s Prize’ Runner Beans.
Mr. Thursby, Colchester, sent an Apple (Darcy Spice x
Keswick Codlin). It was very like ‘ Domino.’
Mr. J. Rolfe, Stanford-le-Hope, sent a new Tomato, very dark
in colour, smooth and of good shape, but the flavour, perhaps
owing to the lateness of the season, was not remarkable. It was
ordered to be grown at Chiswick for trial.
Captain Carstairs, Welford Park (gr. Mr. Ross), sent Pears
‘The Popham’ and ‘ McKinley,’ neither of which was ripe.
Also Apple ‘Opal,’ which was thought too small for cooking
purposes.
Fruir AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 26, 1897.
Puinie Crow ey, Esq., in the Chair, and seventeen members
present. :
Awards Recommended : —
Silver-gilt Knightian Medal.
To C. A. Bayer, Esq., Tewkesbury Lodge, Forest Hill (gr.
Mr. Taylor), for a splended collection of Grapes, including
‘Foster’s Seedling,’ ‘Mrs. Pince,’ ‘Gros Guillaume,’ ‘ Grog
Colmar,’ ‘Muscat of Alexandria,’ ‘Trebbiano,’ ‘ Lady Downes,’
‘ Alnwick Seedling,’ ‘ Black Hamburgh,’ and ‘ Alicante.’
To Messrs. Laing, Forest Hill, for 100 dishes of Apples and
Pears,
CXGVili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Messrs. Cheal, Crawley, for 100 dishes of Apples and
Pears.
To Messrs. Cannell, Swanley, for a collection of Vegetables.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Carter, High Holborn, for a collection of the
varieties of Beet.
Award of Merit.
To Turnip ‘Golden Ball’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dobbie, Rothesay.
To Turnip ‘ Model White’ (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Dobbie.
To Melon ‘ Excelsior ’ (votes, 11 for), from Earl Percy, Syon
House (gr. Mr. Wythes). Fruit quite round, beautifully netted,
white flesh, excellent flavour.
To Grape ‘Marchioness of Downshire’ (votes, 10 for, 2
against), from the Marquis of Downshire, Hillsborough Castle,
co. Down (gr. Mr. Bradshaw), raised from White Gros Colmar,
fertilised with pollen of Muscat of Alexandria. A fine white
Grape of excellent flavour and of good keeping qualities. Berries
almost round.
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. Spratt, Vassal Road, Brixton, sent some Vegetable
Marrows.
Messrs. Dobbie sent specimens of Parsley and Kale.
W.H. Evans, Esq., Forde Abbey (gr. Mr. Crook), sent a
fine dish of Tomatos grown outdoors, and 2 dishes of late Plums
‘Coe’s Golden Drop’ and ‘ Coe’s late Red.’
From Chiswick came a Melon which had been grown from
seed sent by Mr. Barr from Persia. ‘The fruit was in appearance
like a short fat Cucumber, of a greenish-yellow colour, and of
very indifferent flavour, though juicy and refreshing.
Mr. John Beale, Shoreham, sent a seedling Apple.
Pear ‘The Popham,’ shown at the last meeting, was
brought up from Chiswick. It somewhat resembled ‘ Duchesse
d’Angouléme,’ being sweet and juicy, but with a good deal of
grittiness.
Mr. Veit, Audley Kind, Saffron Walden, sent Potato ‘ Diamond
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 5. CXxelx
Jubilee,’ which was ordered to be cooked at the Committee’s
next meeting at Chiswick.
Mr. Outram, Fulham, sent a dish of ‘ Royal Dutch’ Medlar.
Mr. Dykes, Hubton Hall, Newark, sent a seedling Apple,
which the Committee desired to see again in March.
Mr. B. Wright, Lyndon Hall, Oakham, sent a seedling
Apple raised from ‘Dumelow’s Seedling,’ of very pretty
appearance.
Messrs. Garcia & Jacobs, of Covent Garden, sent three boxes
of magnificent Pears, which they had imported from California,
grown by A. Block, Esq., of Santa Clara. Amongst them were
‘Doyenné du Comice,’ ‘Kaster Beurré,’ ‘ Beurré Clairgeau,’
‘Winter Nelis,’ ‘ Vicar of Winkfield’ (known in America as
‘ Bon Curé ’), ‘ Glou Morceau,’ and ‘ Uvedale’s St. Germain ’ (syn.
‘Belle Angevine’). With the exception of the last, which is a
cooking Pear, they were all of immense size and of superb flavour
and quality, fully equal, if not superior, to any English-grown
fruits. 'The Committee desired special thanks to be conveyed to
Messrs. Garcia for their kindness in sending them.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 5, 1897.
Av CHISWICK.
H. Batperson, Ksq., in the Chair and eight members
present.
Awards Recommended : —-
Highly Commended.
To seven Borecoles or Kales, viz. :-—
. Cuthbertson’s strain.
. Brydon’s selected green curled.
. Dobbie’s Victoria.
. Chou de Milan.
. Cottagers.
. Culzean Castle.
. Late Hearting.
“1 O& o FP © bb
Commended.
To ‘Dobbie’s Dwarf Purple’ Kale, syn. ‘ Exquisite Dwari
Purple Curled,’
ce PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Potato ‘ Veit’s Diamond Jubilee.’
To Potato ‘ Sutton’s Supreme.’
The Committee tasted four varieties of Potatos and examined
forty-six stocks of Kales and Borecoles. (See p. 279.)
FRuIT AND VEGETABLE CoMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9, 1897.
Puitre Crowey, Ksq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Mr. W. Iggulden, Frome, for four baskets of magnificently
coloured Gros Colmar Grapes.
To the Duke of Rutland, Belvoir Castle (gr. Mr. Divers), for
thirty-two varieties of Pears in fine condition.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Harrison, of Leicester, for a very interesting
collection of varieties of Beet.
Other Exhibits :—
Karl Percy, Syon House (gr. Mr. Wythes), sent a new and
promising autumn Cabbage, ‘Wythes’ St. Martin,’ which had
been sown on June 26, and was ready for use in the middle of
October. It was requested to be tried at Chiswick.
Her Majesty the Queen, Windsor (gr. Mr. Owen Thomas),
sent a new Cucumber ‘ Frogmore all the Year Round,’ the result
of a cross between ‘ Rochford’s Market’ and ‘Dickson’s All the
Year Round.’ The fruits were very even and fine, and the
Committee were much impressed, but requested to see it in
February.
Mr. Knowles, Woking, sent a seedling Pear, which was
unfortunately quite rotten.
Messrs. Hartland & Son, Slough, Cork, sent an Apple,
‘Munster Pippin,’ a very high and angular fruit of the most
beautiful crimson and gold colour and appearance, but distinetly
unpleasing to the palate.
Mr. Swailes, of Beverley, sent a fruit of Cox’s Orange Pippin,
well coloured except for about a quarter of its surface, which
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 23. cci
was almost absolutely greenish-white, and this part it was said
had been towards the sun.
The Rev. Gordon Salmon, Overton, sent specimens of double
budded Pears :—Pitmaston budded on Beurré de l’Assomption,
Pitmaston on Winter Nelis, Pitmaston on Catillac, Pitmaston on
Huyshe’s Princess of Wales, Pitmaston on Autumn Bergamot,
Pitmaston on Glou Morceau, Pitmaston on Thompson’s, Pit-
maston on Comice, Louise Bonne on Thomson’s, Louise Bonne
on Swan’s Egg, Louise Bonne on Marie Louise, Beurré Diel on
Marie Louise. The fruit had unfortunately been packed in
strong-smelling hay, and had been a week on their journey, so
that it was impossible to distinguish the variation in flavour (if
any) caused by the double budding, and the Committee did not
consider it wise to pronounce on a slight variation in form from
inspection of single fruits only; but they were greatly obliged to
Mr. Salmon for so kindly sending them.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, NovEMBER 23, 1897.
Puinip CRowLEY, Ksq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Lee Campbell, Esq., Glewston Court, Ross (gr. Mr.
Bayford), for a collection of superb Apples.
To Lord Aldenham, Aldenham House (gr. Mr. Backett), for
a collection of huge Onions.
To Messrs. Rivers, Sawbridgeworth, for six baskets of Apples.
Award of Merit.
To Grape ‘ Directeur Tisserand’ (votes, unanimous), from
Messrs. T. Rivers, Sawbridgeworth. The berries, though not
large, are intensely black, oval, with a glorious bloom, of fine
flavour for a late Grape, and have a skin so thick (though by no
means an unpleasant one) that it was thought probable this
variety might keep even later than Alicante, Gros Colmar, or
Lady Downes. Whilst recommending an Award of Merit, the
Committee thought that if it could be shown in as good condition
in February or March, it might deserve a higher award.
Xx
cc PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Apple ‘ Lady Falmouth’ (votes 6 for, 4 against), from
Mr. Geo. Chambers Mereworth. Fruit medium size to small,
round, flat, eye ina shallow depression, very short stalk in a
narrow opening. Of the type of ‘ Court Pendu Plat,’ but with
smoother skin, and the stalk not so much depressed. Flavour
excellent, not unlike Fearn’s Pippin. Colour very deep bright
crimson. Of free growth anda good cropper. The wood and
srowth somewhat resembling ‘ Cox’s Orange.’
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. Jeffries, Cirencester, sent an Apple ‘ Reinette
Superfine,’ which was considered too nearly identical with
‘Anne Elizabeth.’
Mrs. Henry Jackson, Carshalton, sent two unnamed Apples:
one was thought to be probably a seedling from ‘ Winter
Hawthornden,’ the other was quite unknown.
Mr. W. Batchelor, Oxbridge sent fruits of ‘Cape Goose-
berries.’
The Surrey Seed Co. sent a Potato which was ordered to be
tried at Chiswick.
Mr. J. Grandfield, Acton, sent some Walnuts, in appearance
exactly like smooth cobnuts, but of excellent flavour, and toa
great extent lacking the bitter inside skin.
Messrs. Sander & Co., of St. Albans, sent specimen plants of
a new dwarf French Bean bearing gigantic pods. It had been
grown under glass, but it was suggested it would prove as hardy
as other French Beans. It was requested that seed be sent to
Chiswick.
Messrs. Rivers sent a White Grape named ‘ Gradiska,’ very
transparent and very firm in the flesh, but with little flavour.
Mr. T. Canning, Aldenham Park Gardens, Bridgenorth,
sent a single specimen of an Apple he had grown from a pip
out of one sent him from America. It was in appearance like
a very fine ‘ Annie Elizabeth,’ but it was considered of far better
quality, and sweeter—in fact an excellent fruit. Mr. Canning
was advised to cultivate it, and send six specimens if possible
next year.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, DECEMBER 14. CCili
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE COMMITTEE, DECEMBER 14, 1897.
Puinip Cowtey, Hsq., in the Chair, and nineteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Knightian Medal.
To Mr. H. Berwick, Sidmouth, for thirty-six dishes of beautiful
Apples.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To the Earl of Galloway, K.T., Wigtonshire (gr. Mr. J. Day),
Fic. 126.—Prar ‘Presipent Baras&.’ (Jowrnal of Horticulture.)
for twenty dishes of Apples. The fruit was greatly admired as
coming from so far north. |
To Mr. 8. Mortimer, Farnham, for some boxes of very bright
clean Tomatos.
Award of Merit.
To Pear ‘President Barabé’ (votes, 15 for), from Lord
x 2
CC1V PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Suffield, Gunton Park (gr. Mr. Allan). Eye very large and
open, filling the entire depression which is very slight; stalk
very short and thick in a very small depression. Round to
ovate, resembling in shape Fondante d’Automne; skin rough,
bright brown to yellow; very juicy and of very fine flavour. A
magnificent late Pear. (Fig. 126.)
To Celery ‘Solid White’ (votes, 9 for, 6 against), from
Messrs. Sutton, Reading. Very solid, crisp, and particularly |
sweet. An excellent variety.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Bain, gr. to Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford,
for magnificent specimens of Celeriac ‘ Géant de Prague.’
Other Exhibits.
Her Majesty the Queen, Windsor (gr. Mr. Owen Thomas),
sent Cucumber ‘ Frogmore All the Year Round.’ The Committee
desired to see it in February.
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford (gr. Mr. Bain), sent
‘Celeriave a feuilles panachées’ and some very fine specimens of
‘Couve Tronchuda.’
Messrs. Kent & Brydon, Darlington, sent ‘ Brydon’s Prize
White ’ Celery.
Mr. J. Cross, Bury St. Edmunds, sent ‘Victoria Pink’
Celery.
C. Lee Campbell, Esq., Glewston Court, sent Apple
‘Stamford Pippin.’ It was not considered quite good enough
for a dessert Apple, and hardly large enough for a cooking
variety.
Mr. A. Outram, Fulham, sent ‘ Jubilee Red Plume’ Celery.
Edward Williamson, Esq., Congleton, sent fruits of a seedling
Apple, ‘ No. 4.’ They were juicy and of good flavour, but small,
and the texture of the flesh tough. Mr. Williamson in sending
them said: “It is only the second year’s fruiting: they will
double in size in two years more, and some further increase will
take place in the fifth year, after which I never find any further
change. Flavour as well as size improve alike for five years.”
The Committee would be glad to see them in their fifth year.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 4. cev
FLORAL COMMITTEE.
At Cuyiswick, OcToBER 4, 1897.
W. MarsnHatyt, Esq., in the Chair, and seyen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Highly Commended (x x x).
To the following Chrysanthemums:—Edie Wright, La
Vierge, Orange Child, Alice Butcher, Madame Edouard Lefort,
Lady Fitzwygram, Ivy Stark, Bronze Prince, Fiberta, Mar-
tinmas, Harvest Home, Blanche Colomb, and Madlle. Guin-
dudeau.
Also to Zonal Pelargoniums as winter flowering varieties :—
Adolphe Brisson, Jules Lemaitre, and W. D’Ombrain.
For report on Chrysanthemums, see p. 287.
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, OcTOBER 12, 1897.
GrorGE Paut, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Banksian Medal.
To Right Hon. Lord Aldenham, Aldenham House, Elstree
(gr. Mr. E. Beckett), for a very large collection of Asters
(Michaelmas Daisies).
To Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea, for a group of Asters
(Michaelmas Daises) in pots, showing their natural habits and
value for decorative purposes.
To Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, for a group of hardy
flowers, Cotoneasters, Pernettyas, and Roses.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Earl Perey, Syon House, Brentford (gr. Mr. G. Wythes),
for a collection of Chrysanthemums.
To Mr. H. B. May, Upper Edmonton, for a well-flowered
group of Begonia ‘ Gloire de Lorraine.’
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. B. S. Williams, Holloway, for a group of Crotons.
(Gardeners’ Chronicle).
ATHEA SPECIES (MARANTA PICTA.)
AL
27.—C
Fia. 1
FLORAL COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 12. CCVil
To Mr. H. Deverill, Cornhill, Banbury, for a group of hardy
flowers.
To Mr. G. Prince, Oxford, for a group of Roses arranged
in stands, baskets, and vases.
Award of Merit.
To strain of Begonia grandiflora erecta cristata (Tuberous),
(votes, unanimous), from Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford,
Dorking (gr. Mr. W. Bain). The large beautifully crested flowers
are of various shades of salmon, red, rose, pink, and orange.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Mrs. Wingfield’ (as a
decorative variety) (votes, 9 for, 4 against), from Mrs. Winefield,
Ampthill House, Ampthill (gr. Mr. W. J. Empson). Plant of
dwarf habit; very free flowering ; flowers large, soft pink.
To Veronica Silver Star (votes, 9 for), from Messrs. Jas.
Veitch, Chelsea. A very dwarf, compact, free-growing variety
with thick, ovate, pale green leaves, broadly margined with
creamy-yellow.
To Nandina domestica (votes, 11 for), from Messrs. Jas.
Veitch. An old but very rare plant, native of China and Japan.
Its ight green compound leaves assume a bright reddish crimson
colour in autumn.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘ Madame G. Bruant’ (votes,
12 for, 2 against), from Messrs. J. R. Pearson, Chilwell,
Notts. Flowers very large, the petals long, white shading
to yellow, and pinkish purple towards the tips.
To Maranta picta (votes, 8 for, 4 against), from Mr. W. Bull,
Chelsea. A dwarf ornamental plant from Brazil. The leaves
are 10 inches long by 3 inches broad, dark green, with olive
ereen markings. (Fig. 127.)
Other Exhibits.
The Marquis of Huntly, Orton Longueville, Peterborough
(gr. Mr. A. Harding), sent some very fine cones of the Santa
Lucia Silver Fir (Abies bracteata).
Mrs. Parr, The Cedars, Upper Tooting (gr. Mr. J. Stott), sent
three varieties of Gloxinias.
From J. T. Bennett-Poé, Esq., Holmwood, Cheshunt (gr.
Mr. Downes), came a very handsome plant of Sarracenia
Kblana, the result of a cross between 8. flava and §. purpurea,
raised at the Glasnevin Botanic Garden.
CCViili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
The Rev. W. Shirley, Southwick, Hants, submitted flowers
of a very fine unnamed seedling Nerine. The Committee asked
to see a plant in flower.
H. J. Harris, Esq., Bowden Hill House, Chippenham (er.
Mr. W. J. Penton), sent sixteen bunches of Violet ‘The Czar.’
From Mr. W. Wells, Earlswood, Redhill, came four varieties
of Decorative Chrysanthemums.
Mr. R. Owen, Maidenhead, sent a small group of Chrysan-
themums and Cannas.
Mr. A. J. Stanley, Crosby, Liverpool, sent a bunch of Decora-
tive Dahlia ‘J. R. Callender.’
Mr. R. Botting, Henfield, submitted examples of a new
Japanese Chrysanthemum, named ‘ Henfield.’
Mx. W. Potten, Cranbrook, Kent, staged a group of Michaelmas
Daisies and Single Begonias.
Messrs. J. Peed, West Norwood, sent a group of Begonia
‘ Gloire de Lorraine.’
From Messrs. Hawkins & Bennett, Twickenham, came a num-
ber of well-flowered plants of Zonal Pelargonium ‘ Duke of Fife.’
Messrs. W. Cuthbush, Highgate, sent a group of berry-bearing
plants.
Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth, submitted eight varieties of
Chrysanthemums.
Messrs. James Veitch, of Chelsea, showed under the name of
Vitis Coignetize a small group of a very beautiful decorative vine.
The foliage was of a brilliant deep crimson. It is perfectly hardy,
and makes a glorious mass of colour in autumn (Fig. 128). It is
not, however, identical with the Vitis Coignetie of Mr. Anthony
Waterer, nor is it the same as that introduced from Japan by
Madame Coignet. The leaves of this latter are much more
leathery, and are thickly covered with fawn-coloured down on the
under side.
FLORAL COMMITTEE AT CHISWICK, OCTOBER 22, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and eight members present.
Awards Recommended :—
Award of Merit.
To early flowering Chrysanthemum, Madame F. de Cariel
(votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Dobbie and Messrs. Barr.
Fie. 128.—Viris CoicneTiz. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Highly Conumended ( x x x).
To early flowering Chrysanthemums: Mdlle. Sabatier,
Madame Gajac, Ryecroft Glory.
ccx PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Also to the following Zonal Pelargoniums: Miss Joliffe,
Zenobia, Lecomte de Lisle, Lilacina, Le Rhone, Niagara and
Lilian. |
For report on Chrysanthemums, see p. 287.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, OcToBER 26, 1897.
W. MarsHatu, Ksq., in the Chair, and twenty-four members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth, for a large collection of
Chrysanthemums.
Silver Gilt Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. W. Paul, Waltham Cross, for Roses.
To Mr. W. Wells, Earlswood, Redhill, for Chrysanthemums.
Silver Flora Medal.
To H. J. Elwes, Esq., Colesborne, Andoversford, for a group
of well-flowered Nerines.
To Mr. H. B. May, Edmonton, for Adiantums and Begonias.
To Messrs. J. Laing, Forest Hill, for a group of foliage
and flowering plants.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Earl Percy, Syon House, Brentford (gr. Mr. G. Wythes),
for Chrysanthemums. ;
To Miss Emett,6 St. Charles’s Square, North Kensington,
for models of flowers.
To Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea, for a large group of
Chrysanthemums in pots.
To Messrs. H. Cannell, Swanley, for Chrysanthemums.
To Messrs. W. Cutbush, Highgate, for a group of foliage
and flowering plants.
To Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, for Chrysanthemums,
Carnations, and Pyracanthas.
First Class Certificate.
To Marattia Burkei (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Jas.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 26. ccxi
Veitch, Chelsea. A very graceful Fern of vigorous and sturdy
habit, with broad glossy green finely divided fronds.
Award of Merit.
To Gesnera amabilis (votes, unanimous), from the Duke of
Sutherland, Trentham (gr. Mr. P. Blair). The cream-white
bell-shaped flowers are borne with great freedom on erect
pyramidal spikes.
To Nerine ‘ Lady Dorington’ (votes, unanimous), from H. J.
Elwes, Colesborne, Andoversford, Gloucester. Flowers large,
pink, striped with rosy purple down the centre of each petal.
To Nerine ‘Lady Mary Shelley’ (votes, unanimous), from
H. J. Elwes, Esq. Flowers large, pale pink, shaded with
salmon. Vigorous grower.
To Nerine ‘ Lady Lawrence’ (votes, unanimous), from H. J.
Elwes, Esq. Flowers of moderate size, the long narrow wavy
petals are of a pretty shade of orange suffused with salmon.
To Nerine ‘Lady Lucy Hicks Beach’ (votes, unanimous),
from H. J. Elwes, Esq. The rosy crimson flowers are borne in
large trusses. A grand variety.
To Nerine ‘ Lady Bromley’ (votes, unanimous), from H. J.
Elwes, Esq. The large flowers are produced with great freedom.
Colour scarlet, each petal having a distinct slate-coloured band
down the centre.
To Nerine ‘ Lady Llewellyn’ (votes, unanimous), from H. J.
Elwes, Esq. Flowers large, petals broad, colour rosy magenta.
To Nerine ‘Countess Bathurst’ (votes, unanimous), from
H. J. Elwes, Esq. Flowers large, blush white, pink centre,
lower portion of each petal striped with rose-pink.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Madame Philippe Rivoire’
(votes, 16 for, 2 against), from Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth.
The pure white flowers are large, massive, and of excellent form.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Ella Curtis’ (votes, 17 for),
from Mr. J. Godfrey. A very fine variety with large rich
golden yellow flowers.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Lady Ridgeway’ (votes,
unanimous), from Mr. W. J. Godfrey and Messrs. H. Cannell,
Swanley. A magnificent variety. Flowers large, salmon buff,
yellow reverse,
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘ Lady Byron’ (votes, 13 for),
ecexii PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
from Mr. W. J. Godfrey and Mr. W. Wells, Redhill. A very
fine variety with large flowers, white shaded with green in the
centre.
-To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘ Modesto’ (votes, unanimous),
from Mr. W. J. Godfrey. Flowers large, deep yellow.
To Incurved Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Sunstone’ (votes,
unanimous), from Mr. W. J. Godfrey. A very handsome
variety with large canary yellow flowers.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Simplicity’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Mr. W. J. Godfrey. A magnificent variety with
long narrow pure white drooping florets.
To Incurved Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘ Robert Powell’
(votes 6 for, 4 against), from Messrs. H. Cannell and Mr. W.
Wells. Flowers of medium size, colour rich bronzy yellow.
To Incurved Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘N.C.8. Jubilee’
(votes, 12 for, 7 against), from Messrs. H. Cannell and Mr. W.
Wells. A handsome variety with large soft pink flowers.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘ Lady Hanham’ (votes, 12
for, 1 against), from Messrs. H. Cannell and Messrs. James
Veitch. Flowers large, salmon pink shaded with cerise.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘G. J. Warren’ (votes, 16 for,
2 against), from Mr. ag Wells. A very fine variety with clear
yellow flowers.
Other Exhibits.
Lord Wantage, Lockinge Park, Wantage (gr. Mr. Fyfe), sent
a group of seedling Sunflowers.
W. H. Evans, Esq., Forde Abbey, Chard (gr. Mr. J. Crook),
sent a small group of cut flowers.
From J. C. Garnier, Esq., Rookesbury Park, Fareham (gr.
Mr. N. Molyneux), came a very fine Chrysanthemum named
‘Mrs. N. Molyneux.’
C. F. Thompson, Esq., Penhill Close, Cardiff (gr. Mr. T.
Mann), sent flowers of Chrysanthemum ‘ Hazelden Thompson.’
From Messrs. J. R. Pearson, Chilwell, Notts, came very fine
blooms of Chrysanthemum ‘ Mrs. G. W. Palmer.’
Mr. R. Owen, Maidenhead, staged six varieties of Chrysan-
themums.
Messrs. Crane & Clarke, March, Cambridgeshire, sent Tree
Carnation ‘Madame Diaz Albertina.’
FLORAL COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9. ccxili
FLORAL CoMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9, 1897.
C. E. SuHea, Esq., in the Chair, and eleven members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. R. Gilzow, Bexley Heath, Kent, for 75 varieties of
Dracenas.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Earl Percy, Syon House, Brentford (gr. Mr. G. Wythes),
for Chrysanthemums.
To Mr. John Russell, Richmond, for a most interesting
collection of Ivies grown in tree-form in pots.
Award of Merit.
To Sonerila ‘Lady Burton’ (votes, 5 for), from Sir Trevor
Lawrence, Bart., Dorking (gr. Mr. W. Bain). A very ornamental
foliage plant, growing to a height of about 8 inches, with
silvery-grey foliage and conspicuous green venations.
To strain of Wallflower ‘ Parisian Early ’ (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea. Plants of dwarf sturdy
habit; very free flowering ; flowers very fragrant, large, yellow,
tinged with bronze.
To Japanese Refiexed Chrysanthemum ‘ Admiral Ito ’ (votes,
7 for, 2 against), from Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth. Large
flowers of a deep golden yellow colour.
To Dracena albo-lineata (votes, 7 for), from Mr. R.
Gilzow, Bexley Heath. Leaves 20 inches long, narrow, deep
green, margined with creamy-white.
To Dracena Indivisa Burtoni (votes, 7 for), from Mr. R.
Gilzow. A graceful variety with long narrow arching bronze
green leaves, striped with reddish purple down the centre.
To Bouvardia Humboldti grandiflora (votes, 10 for), from
Messrs. Crane & Clarke, March, Cambridge. Plant of vigorous
habit, with glossy green leaves, and large pure white sweetly
scented flowers.
Other Exhibits.
A. Kingsmill, Ksq., Harrow Weald, sent some well-berried
CCxiv PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
sprays of Vitis heterophylla humulifolia, a Vine with turquoise-
blue Grapes.
C. I’. Thompson, Esq., Penhill Close, Cardiff (gr. Mr. T.
Mann), exhibited Seedling Pentstemons.
From F. W. Moore, Esq., Glasnevin, came examples of
Cyrtanthera chrysostephana.
Messrs. Hugh Low, Bush Hill, Enfield, staged a group of
Mathew’s ‘ Winter Red’ Carnation.
“Messrs. W. Balchin, Hassocks, Sussex, sent Diplacus rubra
and D. ‘Jubilee.’ The Committee asked to see these again in
the spring.
Chrysanthemums were exhibited by—
(1) Sir Trevor Lawrence, Dorking (gr. Mr. W. Bain).
(2) W. W. Mann, Esq., Ravenswood, Bexley.
(8) Mr. C. Caddell, Cainfield, Herts.
(4) Mr. R. Owen, Maidenhead.
(5) The Devon Chrysanthemum Nursery, Teignmouth.
(6) Mr. Wiles, Down, Kent.
(7) Mr. G. Lane, Highfield, Englefield Green.
(8) Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth.
(9) Mr. M. Silsbury, Shanklin, I.W.
Fiorat CommittEE, NovEMBER 23, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Mr. H. J. Jones, Lewisham, for Chrysanthemums.
Silver-gilt Banksian Medal.
To J. W. Temple, Esq., Leyswood, Groombridge (gr. Mr. F,
Cubberley\, for an exceptionally well-flowered group of Begonia
‘Gloire de Lorraine.’
To Mr. W. Wells, Earlswood, for Chrysanthemums.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Mr. L. H. Caleutt, Fairholt Road, Stoke Newington, for
table decorations.
i
Hi
—————
o (=
Fre. 129.—Aprra Arunprnaczs. See p. elxv. (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
CCXV1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Dowager Lady Freake, Fulwell Park, Twickenham (gr.
Mr. A. H. Rickwood), for Chrysanthemums.
To Messrs. W. Cutbush, Highgate, for Pernettyas.
To Messrs. T. Cripps, Tunbridge Wells, for Poinsettias.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Mr. R. Owen, Maidenhead, for Chrysanthemums.
Award of Merit.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Mary Molyneux’ (votes,
9 for), from J. C. Garnier, Esq., Rookesbury Park, Fareham (gr.
Mr. N. Molyneux). Flowers large, of good form and substance;
colour soft pink with a silvery reverse.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Mrs. H. Folkes’ (votes,
12 for), from C. E. Strachan, Esq., Gaddesden Place, Hemel
Hempstead (gr. Mr. H. Folkes). A magnificent variety with
long narrow curled pure white petals.
To Begonia ‘Julius’ (votes, 12 for), from Messrs. James
Veitch, Chelsea. A very handsome free flowering variety with
deep green leaves and large trusses of double salmon-rose flowers.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Julia Scaramanga’ (votes,
unanimous), from Mr. W. Wells, Earlswood. Flowers large
deep terra-cotta with a paler reverse.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘Georgina Pitcher’ (votes,
unanimous), from Mr. W. Wells. A handsome variety with
large rich yellow flowers.
To Japanese Chrysanthemum ‘ F. A. Bevan’ (votes, unani-
mous), from Mr. Wells. Soft pink flowers of medium size.
Other Exhibits.
A. Kingsmill, Esq., Harrow Weald, submitted sprays of Skim-
mia Foremani and Pernettyas.
Mr. T. H. Smith, The Titt, Cobham, sent two Carnations.
Messrs. Hugh Low, Clapton, sent Carnations and Begonias.
Messrs. J. Veitch, Chelsea, exhibited Begonia ‘ Mrs. Heal.’
Mr. A. Tullet, Swanley, sent Zonal Pelargonium ‘ A. Tullet.’
Chrysanthemums were exhibited by—
(1) Mons. Annatole Cardonnier, Bayonne, France.
(2) Mr. G. Beer, Worthing.
(83) Mr. H. Becker, Jersey.
(4) Mr. W. J. Godfrey, Exmouth.
FLORAL COMMITTEE, DECEMBER 14. CCXVii
Frorat ComMITTEE, DECEMBER 14, 1897.
W. MarsHatt, Esq., in the Chair, and twenty-four members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To J. W. Temple, Esq., Leyswood, Groombridge (gr. Mr.
F. Cubberley), for Chrysanthemums in pots.
To Mr. H. J. Jones, Lewisham, for Chrysanthemums.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To A. Pears, Esq., Spring Grove, Isleworth (gr. Mr. W. Farr),
for Euphorbias (Poinsettias) and Begonias.
To Messrs. H. Cannell, Swanley, for Zonal Pelargoniums.
To Messrs. W. Cutbush, Highgate, for double Primulas.
Bronze Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Hugh Low, Enfield, for Carnations and Cyclamen.
Award of Merit.
To Begonia ‘ Winter Cheer ’ (B. Socotranag x B. Tuberous
variety) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. James Veitch, Chelsea.
A vigorous growing variety of erect habit, with deep green leaves
and large rosy carmine single flowers borne in loose trusses.
Other Exhibits.
W. C. Walker, Esq., Percy Lodge, Winchmore Hill (gr. Mr.
Cragg), sent flowering sprays of Cissus discolor.
W. H. Evans, Esq., Forde Abbey, Chard (gr. Mr. J. Crook),
sent a small bunch of cut flowers.
A. R. Knight, Esq., Hardinge Road, Ashford, Kent, exhibited
a patent flower-pot. |
Mr. J. Bryson, Helensborough, sent eight varieties of
Chrysanthemums.
From Messrs. E. Hillier, Winchester, came a white sweet-
scented Carnation named ‘ Miss Lilian Hillier.’
Mr. J. R. Tranter, Henley-on-Thames, sent Japanese
Chrysanthemum ‘ Mrs. J. R. Tranter,’
CCXViili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
ORCHID COMMITTEE.
OcToBER 12, 1897.
Harry J. Verrou, Ksq., in the Chair, and thirteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. James Veitch, King’s Road, Chelsea, for a very
fine group of Orchids, in which were many showy and rare
hybrids.
Silver Flora Medal.
To R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge, Camberwell, for
an effective group of Cattleya labiata, including the white
C. labiata ‘ R. I. Measures.’
To Messrs. Hugh Low, Clapton, for a group of Orchids.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. B. S. Williams, Upper Holloway, for a group
of Orchids.
Award of Merit.
To Vanda coerulea Rochfordiana (votes, unanimous), from
Mr. T. Rochford, Turnford Hall, Herts. A very distinct variety,
with pure white sepals and petals, and pink-coloured labellum.
To Vanda x Moorei (V. Kimballiana x V. cerulea, nat. hyb.)
(votes, unanimous), from Mr. J. W. Moore, Eldon Place, Brad-
ford. The plant exhibited was intermediate in character between
the reputed parents. Sepals and petals white, tinged with
lavender ; front lobe of the lip dull purple. (Fig. 180.)
To Odontoglossum grande Pittianum (votes, unanimous),
from H. T. Pitt, Esq., Rosslyn, Stamford Hill (gr. Mr. Aldous).
A clear yellow variety, in which the brown colour seen in the
type is suppressed.
To Zygopetalum Jorisianum (votes, 6 for, 1 against), from
Walter Cobb, Esq., Dulcote, Tunbridge Wells (gr. Mr. J. Howes).
A pretty species introduced by Messrs. Linden, and illustrated
in ‘ Lindenia,’ v. t. 98. ( Fig. 181.)
To Lelia pumila, ‘Low’s var.’ (votes, unanimous), from
ORCHID COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 12. eCxix
Messrs. Hugh Low, Clapton. A blue-tinted variety, much
resembling L. pumila ‘ Gatton Park var.’
Botanical Certificate.
To Cryptophoranthus Dayanus, from Sir Trevor Lawrence,
Fie. 130.—Vanpa Mooret. (Gardeners’? Magazine.)
Bart., Burford, Dorking. A splendid specimen bearing many
singular flowers was shown.
To Dendrobium taurinum amboinense, from Messrs. James
Veitch. A remarkable variety, distinguished from the type by
its yellow and brown flowers.
To Nanodes Mantinii, from F. W. Moore, Esq., Royal
Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, Dublin.
Other Exhibits.
His Grace the Duke of Westminster, Eaton Hall, Chester
gr. Mr. Barnes), sent a very fine form of Dendrobium
Phalenopsis Schréderianum.
¥ 2
CCxx PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Fie. 131.—Zyaorrtatum Jortstanum. (Gardeners’ Magazine.)
Messrs. F. Sander, St. Albans, showed Cattleya labiata an
other Orchids.
KAN
Wii)
) \
Fie. 132.—Carrnnya x Onrvia. (Journal of Horticulture.)
ible
fT i.
‘ ant 4 Tyg he:
nt
ORCHID COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 26. CCXXi
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming (gr. Mr.
T. W. Bond), showed several hybrid Cattleyas.
J. Bradshaw, Esq., Southgate (gr. Mr. Whiffen), sent
Cattleya x Mantinii nobilior.
J. W. Temple, Esq., Groombridge (gr. Mr. Bristow), showed
Lelio-Cattleya x Templez of unrecorded parentage, but re-
sembling Cattleya x Minucia.
H. J. Harris, Esq., J.P., Chippenham, sent a good variety of
Odontoglossum grande.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, OCTOBER 26, 1897.
Harry J. Vertou, Esq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Jas. Veitch, Chelsea, for a remarkably fine group of
{Orchids, including several hybrids of Lelia Perrinii, and other
autumn-flowering varieties.
Silver Flora Medal.
To R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge, Camberwell, for a
collection of twenty-five varieties of Cattleya labiata, some
hybrid Cypripediums, &c.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Mrs. Wingfield, Ampthill House, Bedfordshire (gr. Mr.
W. J. Empson), for a group of Orchids.
To W. C. Walker, Eisq., Percy Lodge, Winchmore Hill (gr.
Mr. Geo. Cragg), for a group of Orchids.
Award of Merit. _
To Cattleya x ‘Olivia’ (Trianezi @ intermedia ¢) (votes,
unanimous), from Messrs. J. Veitch, Chelsea. Flower in size
equal to a small C. labiata. In cclour of a uniform Peach-
blossom tint. (Fig. 132.)
To Cattleya x ‘Melpomene’ (Forbesii 2 Mendelii 3) (votes,
7 for, O against), from Messrs. Jas. Veitch. Sepals and petals
light rose ; lip white, tinged with pink; centre yellow.
CCXxli PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
To Lelia purpurata ‘Mrs. R. I. Measures’ (votes, 8 for, 2
against), from R. I. Measures, Esq., Cambridge Lodge, Camber-
well (gr. Mr. H.J.Chapman). A variety in which the petals are
closely veined with rose colour on white ground.
To Cattleya x Hardyana var. magnifica (votes, unanimous),
from Fred. Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr. Mr.
T. Stafford). Flowers large, lip broad, and of a dark purplish-
crimson colour.
To Cattleya Bowringiana, Wild’s variety (votes, unani-
mous), from C. K. Wild, Esq., Bramcote, Weybridge (gr. Mr. R.
Pallant). A very large and handsomely coloured variety.
To Lelia pumila, var. albens (votes, unanimous), from
Fred. Hardy, Esq., Tyntesfield, Ashton-on-Mersey (gr. Mr. T.
Stafford). Flowers white, with some purple markings on each
side of the lip.
To Odontoglossum crispum ‘ Sunlight’ (votes, unanimous),
from R. Brooman-White, Esq., Arddarroch, Garelochead, N.B.
Flowers large, white with some red-brown blotches and small
purple spots on the petals.
To Lelia pumila magnifica (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
W. L. Lewis, Southgate. Flowers much larger than the
ordinary form and fine in colour.
To Cypripedium x Haynaldo-Chamberlainii (Haynaldanum
é Chamberlainianum ¢) (votes, unanimous), from Elijah
Ashworth, Esq., Harefield Hall, Wilmslow, Cheshire (gr. Mr.
H. Holbrook). Flowers somewhat resembling those of C.
Victoria Marie. Upper sepal white, green at the base, with
narrow purple lines. Lip rose-purple margined greenish-yellow.
Petals green with chocolate-purple markings.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. W. H. White (gr. to Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart.,
Burford, Dorking), for Lelia Perrinii alba, Burford variety.
Flowers white ; front of the lip pink, as in L. Perrinii nivea.
To Mr. R. Pallant (gr. to C. K. Wild, Esq., Bramcote, Wey-
bridge), for Cattleya Bowringiana, Wild’s variety.
Botanical Certificate.
To Lelia longipes (L. Lueasiana), from Messrs. W. L. Lewis,
Southgate.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9. CCXXili
Other Exhibits.
Messrs. Hugh Low, Clapton, showed varieties of Cattleya
labiata and a number of plants of Vanda cerulea.
Messrs. B. S. Williams, Holloway, staged a group of Orchids.
Messrs. F'. Sander, St. Albans, showed varieties of Cattleya
labiata and other Orchids.
Thos. Statter, Esq., Stand Hall, Whitefield, Manchester (gr.
Mr. R. Johnson), again showed the plant of Cattleya Dowiana
aurea Johnsonii, for which he received a Certificate in 1885.
Mrs. Briggs-Bury, Bank House, Accrington, showed Cattleya
x Adonis, said to be C. Warscewiczii x C. Mossiz, but which
the Committee thought merely an imported light-coloured C.
Warscewiczil.
J. Bradshaw, Esq., The Grange, Southgate (gr. Mr. Whiffen),
sent varieties of Cattleya labiata.
Captain Thos. A. Julian, Woodside, Plymouth, sent two fine
light varieties of Dendrobium Phalenopsis.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Elstead House, Godalming (gr. Mr.
T. W. Bond), showed hybrid Lelio-Cattleyas.
Reginald Young, Esq., Linnet Lane, Sefton Park, Liverpool
(gr. Mr. Poyntz), showed Cattleya Dowiana aurea, Young’s
var., and Cypripedium x Clio.
E. Hockliffe, Esq., The Hall, Uppingham, Rutland (gr. Mr.
Cant), showed Cattleya x Hardyana, Hockliffe’s variety.
Frau Ida Brandt, Riesbach, Zurich (gr. Mr. Schlecht), sent
varieties of Miltonia spectabilis.
G. W. Law-Schofield, Esq., New-Hall-Hey, Rawtenstall,
Manchester, showed Leelia purpurata ‘ Annie Louise.’
Frank Lloyd, Esq., Coombe House, Croydon, showed Cattleya
labiata with abnormal flowers.
T. W. Swinburne, Esq., Corndean Hall, Winchcombe, sent an
abnormal flower of Odontoglossum grande.
OrcHID CommITTEE, NOVEMBER 9, 1897.
Harry J. VeitcH, Esq., in the Chair, and twelve members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Jas. Veitch, Chelsea, for an interesting group of
hybrid Orchids.
CGXX1V PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
dy) ys!)
Yy/
Yy
Fie. 133.—Carrnteya Fania. (Jowrnal of Horticulture.)
Silver Bankstan Medal.
To the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, Birmingham (gr.
Mr. Smith), for well-grown hybrid Cattleyas and Leelio-
Cattleyas.
ORCHID COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 9. CCXXV
To G. Shorland Ball, Esq., Wilmslow, Cheshire (gr. Mr. Alex.
Hay), for a group of rare Orchids.
To. Messrs. W. L. Lewis, Southgate, for a group of 50 Lelia
pumila.
To Messrs. F. Sander, St. Albans, for a group of Orchids.
First Class Certificate.
To Cattleya x ‘Fabia’ (labiata ¢ Dowiana aurea ¢), from the
Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain (gr. Mr. Smith). A fine hybrid,
originally raised by Messrs. Jas. Veitch & Sons, and exhibited
by them in 1894. Flowers large, sepals and petals light rose,
with a slight tinge of yellow; lip broad, dark purple, with some
obscure orange-coloured markings at the base. (Fig. 133.)
To Calanthe x Veitchii alba (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
Hugh Low, Clapton. Flowers pure white, with pale yellow
centre,
Award of Merit.
To Cattleya labiata Lewisii (votes, unanimous), from Messrs.
W. L. Lewis, Southgate. Sepals and petals white, front of lip
violet purple with white margin.
To Cypripedium x Leeanum magnificum (votes, 9 for), from
G. Shorland Ball, Esq. (gr. Mr. A. Hay). Flowers resembling
the variety giganteum, but darker in colour.
Cultural Commendation.
To Mr. Alex. Hay (gr. to G. Shorland Ball, Esq., Wilmslow),
for Cypripedium insigne Sandere with six flowers.
Other Exhibits.
The Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain (gr. Mr. Smith) showed
Cattleya x Massiliensis, a Continental hybrid stated to be between
C. Trianzi and C. Dowiana aurea, but in which the Committee
failed to find traces of the latter.
W. Vanner, Esq., Chislehurst (gr. Mr. Robbins), showed
Cypripedium x Vannere (superbiens x selligerum majus),
C. x Eyermanianum superbum, and Odontoglossum crispum
Dormanianum.
Henry Tate, Esq., Allerton Beeches, Liverpool, sent Cypri-
pedium x Allertonensis (villosum x bellatulum?); and C. insigne
bisepala, with lower sepals larger than the upper.
CCXXVi PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
C. L. N. Ingram, Esq., Godalming (gr. Mr. T. W. Bond),
sent Cattleya x Comfrey (Lawrenceana x Warsciwiczii).
J. T. Bennett Poé, Esq., Holmewood, Cheshunt (gr. Mr.
Downes), showed Vanda Sanderiana and Cypripedium x Phenix,
of unrecorded parentage.
Mrs. 8. Wood, Moorfield, Glossop, sent Cypripedium x Alcides
var.
S. G. Lutwyche, Esq., Beckenham, sent Cypripedium x
pavoninum and C. x Indra.
ORrcHID CoMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 23, 1897.
Harry J. Vertou, Esq., in the Chair, and eleven members
present. :
Awards Recommended :—
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Jas. Veitch, Chelsea, for a group of hybrid
Orchids, principally Cypripediums.
To Messrs. Hugh Low, Clapton, for a group of Orchids.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, Birmingham (gr.
Mr. Smith), for a group of six specimen Cattleyas and Lelio-
Cattleyas, amongst them being the beautiful Lelio-Cattleya
‘Clive’ (C. Dowiana ¢ x L. pumila prestans 3). Sepals and
petals bright rose; lip rich maroon-purple with a golden yellow
base marked with fine red lines. (Fig. 134.)
To Messrs. F. Sander, St. Albans, for a group of Orchids.
Award of Merit.
To Cattleya labiata ‘ White Queen ’ (votes, unanimous), from
W. P. Burkinshaw, Esq., Hessle, near Hull (gr. Mr. J. Barker).
Flowers white, with a lemon-yellow tinge at the base of the lip,
and slight trace of pink at its apex.
To Cypripedium x Beeckmani (stated to be villosum Boxalli
superbum x bellatulum) (votes, unanimous). The majority of
the Committee doubted the use of C. bellatulum as one of the
agents in its production. A massive flower with emerald green
ORCHID COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 23. CCXXVil
dorsal sepal, spotted with black, and edged with white. Petals
broad, chestnut-red, margined yellow; lip chestnut-red with
yellow margin. Flower very glossy.
To Odontoglossum Dayanum (? prestans var.) (votes, unani-
Fie. 134.—La.io-Carrueya ‘ Cuive.’ (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
mous), from Baron Sir H. Schréder, The Dell, Egham (gr. Mr.
H. Ballantine). Flowers of good size, cream-white, spotted
cinnamon colour.
CCXXVili PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
TU
NN
Ye
Fic. 135,—Carrneya ‘Empress Freperick.’ (Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
To Cattleya x ‘ Empress Frederick,’ var. Leonatze (Mossiz x
Dowiana) (votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Jas. Veitch, Chelsea.
\ i : NN WS S
ORCHID COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 23. CCXXx1x
The original form had white sepals and petals ; this variety,
which bore some resemblance to C. x Hardyana, rose-coloured
ones. (Fig. 135.)
To Lelia x ‘Olivia’ (crispa x xanthina) (votes, unanimous),
from Messrs. Jas. Veitch. Flowers yellow, slightly tinged with
red, and with dull rose-coloured markings on the lip.
Botamcal Certificate.
To Cirrhopetalum refractum, from R. I. Measures, Esq.,
|
af!
D f és Y \i
RY \ £
G oll
Fic. 136.—MaxILLaRIA ELEGANTULA. (Gardemners’ Chronicle.)
Cambridge Lodge, Camberwell. This is sometimes called the
‘Windmill Orchid,’ its nodding raceme of greenish-yellow
flowers having the connate sepals extended, so that they move
with the slightest current of air.
To Maxillaria elegantula, Rolfe, from Messrs. F. Sander,
St. Albans, an ally of M. fucata. Flowers white, tinged with
yellow on the outer portions of the segments, and spotted with
chocolate colour. (Fig. 136.)
CCXXX PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Other Exhibits.
Captain Holford, Westonbirt, Tetbury (gr. Mr. A. Chapman),
sent a collection of Orchids.
W. H. Lumsden, Esq., Balmedie, Aberdeen (gr. Mr. Roberts),
seni flowers of varieties of Cypripedium insigne.
The Hon. P. Allsopp, Battenhall Mount, Worcester (gr. Mr.
Fox), sent a fine plant of Cypripedium insigne Vigorniense, a
variety in which the usual spotting is partially suppressed.
Philip Crowley, Esq., Waddon House, Croydon (gr. Mr.
Harris), sent Cattleya labiata and C. 1. rosea.
W. B. Latham, Esq., Botanic Gardens, Edgbaston, Birming-
ham, sent Cypripedium x Deedmanianum (Spicerianum @
Chamberlainianum 3), which bore a remarkable resemblance
to C. x Haynaldo-Chamberlainii shown at the last meeting.
OrcHID ComMITTEE, DECEMBER 14, 1897.
Harry J. Veitcn, Esq., in the Chair, and fifteen members
present.
Awards Recommended :—
Silver-gilt Flora Medal.
To Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking (gr. Mr.
W. H. White), for a fine group of Orchids, in which the beautiful
hybrid Calanthes raised at Burford were conspicuous.
Silver Flora Medal.
To Messrs. Jas. Veitch, Chelsea, for a fine group of Orchids.
Silver Banksian Medal.
To Messrs. Hugh Low, Clapton, for an effective group of
Orchids.
First Class Certificate.
To Calanthe x Harrisi (votes, unanimous), from J. T.
Bennett Poé, Esq., Holmewood, Cheshunt (gr. Mr. Downes). A
white flower characterised by its peculiar broad lip. It had
previously received an Award of Merit. (fig. 137.)
Award of Merit.
To Calanthe x sanguinaria (votes, unanimous), from Sir
) Uy,
~ NO SS
N
ae 4
es
=
a.
=
“04
SS
==
'f:
LE
——-
ap X
UP # tye and
may iisan \
afi we \
iif;
Uf
(Gardeners’ Chronicle.)
Fic. 137.—\CaLantur Harnisit.
CCXXXli PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY.
Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. W. H. White). Flowers dark
blood-red ; very fine.
To Calanthe x Burfordiense (votes, unanimous), from Sir
Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. W. H. White). Flowers bright
carmine-rose.
To Calanthe x Veitchii splendens (votes, unanimous), from
Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. W. H. White). Flowers
larger and darker in colour than the original.
To Brasso-Catt-Lelia x Lindleyano-elegans (Brasso-Cattleya
x Lindleyana x Lelio-Cattleya x elegans) (votes, unanimous),
Fie. 138.—TRIcHopmLia BREVIS. (Gardeners’ Magazine.)
from Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart. A singular cross, with narrow
segments. Sepals and petals blush-white ; lip dark purple.
To Lelia rubescens (votes, unanimous), from Sir Trevor
Lawrence, Bart. (gr. Mr. W. H. White), and from W. C.
Walker, Esq., Winchmore Hill (gr. Mr. G. Cragg). A fine
variety of the plant, generally known in gardens as L. pedun-
cularis. (Fig. 139.)
To Trichopilia brevis (votes, unanimous), from Sir Frederick
Fig. 139.—Lam11a rupuscens. (Gardeners? Magazine.)
ORCHID COMMITTEE, DECEMBER 14. CCXXXill
Wigan, Clare Lawn, East Sheen (gr. Mr. W.H. Young). Sepals
and petals yellow barred with brown; lip white. Of the Helcia
section. (Fig. 138.)
To Cypripedium x Aison giganteum (insigne ¢ Druryi ¢)
(votes, unanimous), from Messrs. Jas. Veitch, Chelsea. )
°
nN
4
Sees. 9. es 96s * ass =e," * 56
fei eee at one eee wie ees mies picks ove ore 2 wu0 : ~ <3 Solas =. “ > ee amar : = .:
ne ete aie -’* » f Sy “ ny = i 5 Nees % ° e Boe ; — ie A 4
a ™ * : p i fl - ; . ¢? ¥ e ae wo .. < be mm i _
a se ee - - 4 % . .
: P 3 F . ~~ : { . * a. : es 7 ft
4 - ; A : |
~ ¢ ' » I'S al :
, , >
. ..? » « & 4 a
>’ rf 7 + , ee = : :
~, ‘
) ; « a te - “ r
s >
J @
: a
a ? ~
x ‘ - >
‘ d v2 : F P i *%, . ;
f } See , :
; ° b ws 5