, sve i" |, 2a). | me | a 4 ear Wee a ee ~ nd a AL ys rae vale " As) ‘ 4 Mn wen by, Ae aie ee, itn iat Base AD ee EO eM ia Sas y aan GR te pr ate yy anatase a a the |W TAR allen md mH Ll PM ep NO oe BIN , a Pn gar wr Pa eee ML Migr ee a x > Pe . me koe eG? al ae ~ T Shri 3 Mates aS nt Mh yuh 5 D Ap epee ( ft x Re ft ws Fy alt 3 7 nk Q s > 7 ~ Eg Dre l roalers Pee rr Ee arm NA os ly * g art, RN A Woe Net x ; = . ~ a has oe, mi = Sy ae : : ow pe ean * ae Pa sels, Oe we * e, i ane ° bs are ee ee eg ee ihe recy ome ve os We er Ri nae Mpg. Se si . 4 Bigg eT os Se ¥ Pie Sk wat beth ‘ . , “ he Sols ~ . eh ‘ K eee age % hs s , . , . : , Ras Mas , 3 — ala i e wi Wit, in. Mos > Bin. Ria . ° 7 c ce lad ye A, «© = ine, a or act: " oe Bene 2. . Phe. e 5%, ’ ee rn, ot x es. wine’. SS - eke © Cae, See nF - ce tal ea i A ae Q era mass Lott ap. v < * . + - tape: pe a} ae 6 ve, —_ a i th mais 4 : 5 oh ag ety “edie 4s Fe 9 : , tl AS ge ok ids ne Aan ? re i ‘ gO Oe ali lcs » Pod _ . s, . _ its “ 7 ae = - ' ty Penne a eas Pn et oe . ahs te se ,, ao ‘3 “> , She Pp, ae S wl foo n yeh, , sto so i Ei She — = Tins + wo ' .. % ; SAE. = oe TT oi a. : 3 ee, gh ‘ : ie: eee eet ?. een Sioee nF > Sas Vey we ea: A, 4 . “ 7 > ; "! 3 x - hom ig, + t a * - ? ; “ r . PD ee ey a i 7 “ . a 2 : a SO ae Se ae : ee GE Na, Mia ig Oa os Me . oe aX ~ 2a; : ‘ares & >, ae ist : a oe * fet. be n'y aN o 4 . age eee ee) Pao é i . i Pe iene oe A aan tee GE 9 . i =i 3 IY ere * a oT tg Te Nostell Soa) Fee gas Q0r a : - ¥ pein ¥ A ait as « a ey tet aes ¥ a Ws a) Ge the: 3 4 a er er ; ~ Py an ee En 4 ie 7h A emg iets roe > . 7 Te See al ete es ee Sh ie NOT, Newreruta ht ee aa eae Sh : Ge aoe en an pee ee "eat lie ane Se tre See ee te a 2 en Bin, A * Ce Naa 4 i OT a rar, é < Ny rstea ri See 5 3 a. ax ed Po - Dae: of « EN ae eae me eS! an. rae Se To Nee ay, 3 eee et oe Ne kaos ae e rie pO Ra \ a erie ae ei tare re A Ae My: emt ba os hay 3 cg , * : 2 : ny ait oe : gears te ert ° As Sah et ts, ee ae Aspe >: Kee G GE GC RE Ie eT De oe ae pe eee eae Gis, ¥ a > n a *” tir CONTENTS OF VOL. XV. foe CONFERENCE ON ASTERS AND PERENNIAL SUNFLOWERS :— PAGE OPENING ADDRESS. By Mr. J. G. BAKmR, F.R.S., F.R.H.S....... 1 THE GENUS ASTER. By Professor G. L. GOODALE .eeceeeceecees 4 THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. By the Rev. (Ci. MAO i ae hl DY OY1 bysaagI\Y bas Wea] a] By bets a A 13 PERENNIAL SUNFLOWERS. By Mr. D. DEWAR..................00. 26 THE CULTURE OF SUNFLOWERS. By Mr. E. H. JENKINS, F.R.H.S. 39 AUTUMNAL TINTS. By Mr. HARRY J. VEITCH, F.L.S., F.R.H.S....... 46 THE UTILISATION OF RAILWAY EMBANKMENTS. By the Rev. Vill NAV MUS GRTOD RR a B33] Ds ai rar otter tn tl uP ae a area Ro 57 FRUIT PAMPHLET.—FRUITS FOR COTTAGERS (SCOTLAND)............ 61 pee GEMEINDE A OE ge AVEIE TI IEA "TH ONiccls iain cities Sisiide dunt eiaielo/s « Sets Pogtesieelee oisiatins otlone's «a 70 ace Oh AHMED PAPE D, SOCTHNDLES s. t2,,5aaaceicncetae Gaaeets onetnecbedeardadesees 71 WINTER VEGETABLES. By Mr. W. IGGULDEN, F.R.HLS. ............... 73 PLANTS FOR House DECORATION. By Mr. JOHN WILLS, F.R.H.S. 84 CULTIVATION OF THE MELON. By My. C. Ross, F.R.H.S. ............ 88 SOMETHING MORE OR LESS ABOUT DAFFODILS. By the Rev. G. P. TSLANTIDYOIN, Ul oiats] E GIS 5 Gos un nu nea SR SU SIRE COC CROCUL DOR ARRE Soe erin ean n anni ia 92 THE FLORIST’s TuLip. By the Rev. FRANCIS D. HORNER, M.A.... 99 SUMMER PRUNING AND TRAINING OF FRUIT-TREES. By Mr. A. PLANTING MBL TET Ores see ures vaste cicleots sich Sais vis oerldaeemie et ve surneneldaastes 111 HARDY CLIMBING AND TRAILING PLANTS. By Mr. W. C. LEAcH, 1D Bo) 8 GiSo an 8 68 SB ROSCOE CH BETO GIST. OES STs ctrl aD Se i aoe 123 ORCHIDS FOR A CooL House. By the Rev. E,. HANDLEY, M.A., SEPA tim SAME IS oes ayes ec otoreic circ cts sini cla oiePe ic eltialcisls elena revaialaieiclv'g ne A acsielGlttave's oie sel 128 INSECT-EATING PLANTS. By Mr. A. J. MANDA, F.R.HLS. ............ 135 THE FUCHSIA: ITS HISTORY AND CULTIVATION. By Mr. Geo. Fry 143 BEGONIA CONFERENCH :— OPENING ADDRESS. By Mr. HARRY J. VEITCH, F.L.S., F.R.H.S8. 153 THE CULTIVATED SPECIES OF BEGONIA. By Mr. W. WATSON, REVAL RS Me acts hes eee ce Mama os eri nicilt iovcsicieiciclatiastels snslesiilaieiei’s lei velswion's 165 TUBEROUS BEGonIAS. By Mr. JoHN LAING, F.R.H.S. ......... 185 WINTER-FLOWERING AND EVERGREEN BEGONIAS. By Mr. H. CANN INEST TG eM AE Vee S semen ee smiec ie aicieeiccrs eleiieldnisienslew sleloecis weisile/sresivieceae oss 194 lV CONTENTS. CoNFERENCE ON APRICOTS AND PLUMS :— ae THe APRICOT IN FRANCE. By Mons. F. JAMIN .................. 200 PLUMS FOR THE MARKET. By Mr. J. SMITH, F.R.H.S.......... 204 DESSERT PLuMS. By Mr. T. FRANCIS RIVERS, F.R.H.S.......... 208 Root-PRUNING OF FRUIT-TREES. By Mr. GEO. BUNYARD, F.R.H.S. 211 THE VARIABILITY IN CULTIVATION OF HARDY FLOWERING PLANTS. By the Rev. C. WOLLEY Dob, M.A., F.R.HS. <..... 02... .:-2cc-2-- one INT MICHAELMAS DAIsIEs.. By Mr. DANIEL DEWAR .................-..--- 229 Cycaps. By Mr. W. CARRUTHERS, F.R.S., F.L.S. ...... 2 ais eases eels 247 FRUIT-TREES IN Pots. By the Reve W..WILKS, M.A. ..... 2.020... 251 ZONAL PELARGONIUMS FOR WINTER. By Mr. C. PEARSON, F.R.H.S. 264 EXTRACTS FROM THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY :— GENERAL MEETINGS AND FELLOWS ELECTED ...........- Stmencee 1 SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE MBETINGS ....00...:0. coccesvecsessee aoe atee xix FRUIT COMMITTEH MEETINGS .........0000..cces00ee+ee Bere angssree LEB FLORAL COMMITTEE MEETINGS ............-.----+- sive oe lxxxvii ORCHID) COMMITTHE, MENTINGS...... 220s. cc0p se. -2esoneces eeeeoeee eee CXITV: NARCISSUS/COMMITTEH MBHTINGS 3, ...cccsssssccst ac encaeceeee pees LOXCVIL TEMPLE) SHOW, 18922. PLAN. OF TENTS AW os cceiia acess soseeoe coesss XCIX BOOKS PRESENTED TO THE LIBRARY IN 1892 ../..........2- va vovaumts cci PLANTS, SEEDS, &c., PRESENTED TO THE GARDENS, CHISWICK, IN 1SOD Angtteate eke fe. eee Soe aA SOR ae derecho Bah See, Jie eee ceil JOURNAL OF THE RoyvaAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. Vout. XV. 1892. CONFERENCE ON ASTERS AND PERENNIAL | SUNFLOWERS Ar CHISWICK, TUESDAY, Octoser 6, 1891. OPENING ADDRESS. By Mr. J. G. Baxer, F.B.S., F.R.HLS. I wii detain you only a few minutes whilst I sketch out what may be called the general botanical outlines of the subject we have met this afternoon to discuss. Composite is one of the best marked of the natural orders, and it is the largest of all of them. About one in ten of all the flowering plants belong to this order, and it keeps up this proportion in a wonderful way both in the old world and in the new, and in all latitudes from the tropics to the arctic-alpine zone, as represented either in the far north or just below the snow-line on high mountains. Its pro- portion and the absolute number of species are highest in North America and Mexico, lowest in India, Malaya, and Polynesia. The total number of known species may be estimated at eight thousand or ten thousand. The most obvious characteristic which distinguishes the different Compositz from one another is in the corolla. We may distinguish three leading types of form—first, the ligulate type, as shown in all the flowers of the Dandelion ; secondly, the tubular type, as shown in all the flowers of a Thistle, Tansy, and Groundsel ; and, thirdly, the irregular, more B 9, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. or less bilabiate type, as shown in the Mutisiaceze. With this third type we have nothing to do at present, and it enters very little into European garden botany. ‘The flowers of the first and second types are aggregated into heads of three different kinds, and the most obvious classification of garden Composite is into three groups, as follows: First, the homogamous ligulate type, in which all the flowers of the head are ligulate, as in Crepis, Lactuca, and Hieracium; secondly, the homogamous tubular type, in which all the flowers of the head are tubular, agin Eupatorium, Vernonia, or Carduus; thirdly, the heterogamous type, in which the central flowers of the head are tubular, com- posing what are called the disc, and the outside flowers, com- posing what is called the rays, are ligulate. To this third group belong both Aster and Helianthus. In the homogamous types all the flowers of the head are usually hermaphrodite. In the heterogamous heads the disc-flowers are usually hermaphro- dite and the ray-flowers more or less incomplete as regards their reproductive organs. A priori one would say that tubular flowers and ligulate flowers represent two extremely different types of structure, but we find that in point of fact they change into one another very easily. The Dahlia, which is nearly allied to the Sunflower, is properly heterogamous, but the majority of garden Dahlias have been changed by eulti- vation, so that all the flowers of the head have become homo- gamous and ligulate. In the common Camomile (Anthemis nobilis) all these types may be seen. It is properly heterogamous, but homogamous ligulate and homogamous tubular forms may be found not unfrequently. Aster is properly heterogamous, but there is a form of our common English seaside Aster Tripolium without any ray, and the other English species, Aster Linosyris never has a ray. More constant characters are found in the involucre, the pappus, the anthers, and the shape of the style- branches. The tribes (of which Bentham and Hooker make thirteen) depend mainly on the shape of the style-branches. Aster is the type of one large tribe which is called Asteroidez, Helianthus of another which is called Helianthoidee. In Asteroide there are upwards of ninety genera, but many of them differ from one another by very slight characters. Of large well-known genera that belong to this tribe, Conyza and Baccharis are homogamous, and in the latter the flowers are CONFERENCE ON ASTERS AND PERENNIAL SUNFLOWERS. 3 unisexual. Bellis differs mainly from Aster by the entire want of a pappus. There isan Aster which is common in the Swiss Alps which is exactly like a Daisy in habit. The heterogamous Asteroideze fall into two groups, a heterochromous series, in which the ligulate ray-flowers are lilac, or reddish, or white, and a homochromous series, in which the ray-flowers are yellow. The best-known genus of the homochromous series is Solidago. Aster as it stands at present contains 200 or 300 species, and is concentrated in the United States. I will not attempt on the present occasion to discuss its subgenera and species in detail. I dealt with them fully in a paper which I contributed to the Gardeners’ Chronicle in 1884, and all that I could say further now would be that a small number of additional species have been brought into cultivation. Nearly all our garden Michaelmas Daisies belong to the species that grow wild in the eastern United States. There are forty species of Aster in the Rocky Mountains and fifteen in California, and most of these are different from the eastern species, and have not yet been brought into cultivation. Erigeron only differs from Aster by its more numerous narrower ray-flowers, and runs into it by gradual stages of gradation. Olearia, of which there are sixty to seventy species in Australia and twenty to thirty in New Zealand, differs mainly from Aster by its shrubby habit. Helianthoidez is another large tribe, of which many of the 140 genera only differ from one another by very slight characters. In a large proportion of them the heads are heterogamous and homochromous, the ray being bright yellow. Helianthus in a wild state is entirely confined to North America. Several of the genera that are allied to it most closely, such as Wedelia, Aspilea, and Viguiera, are not hardy. Coreopsis has a different pappus, Rudbeckia may be distinguished at a glance by its very prominent disc, Helianthella by its flattened fruits, Silphium and. Heliopsis by their large leafy outer involucral bracts. A very interesting paper might be written on the way in which the three commonest garden types, H. multiflorus, annuus, and tuberosus, have been changed by cultivation through a long course of years from their wild originals. The species are extremely difficult of limitation. I will only say that I think they may be best classified under three groups—first, the amuals; secondly, the perennials, with short adpressed B2 4 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. involucral bracts; and thirdly,'the perennials, in which the outer bracts of the involucre are long and more or less spreading. Mr. Dewar has had a large collection constantly under his eye for many years, and is going this afternoon to give us the results of his observations. The predominance of Asters, Sunflowers, and Golden-rods is one of the most marked characteristics of an American as con- trasted with a European landscape. Take, for instance, the following extract from Whittier’s admirable picture of late autumn in New England :— O’er the bare woods, whose outstretched hands Plead with the leaden heavens in vain, I see, beyond the valley lands, The sea’s long level dim with rain. Around me all things, stark and dumb, Seem praying for the snows to come, And, for the summer bloom and greenness gone, With winter’s sunset lights and dazzling morn atone. Along the river’s summer walk The withered tufts of asters nod; And trembles on its arid stalk The hoar plume of the golden-rod. And on a ground of sombre fir, And azure-studded juniper, The silver birch its buds of purple shows, And scarlet berries tell where bioomed the sweet wild-rose. The glow of bright colour which is thrown over our gardens in September and October by the Asters, Sunflowers, Solidagos,. and Dahlias is one of the most valuable gifts that fall within the compass of horticulture for which the old world stands indebted to the new. THE GENUS ASTER. By Professor G. L. Goopats, Harvard University, U.S.A. Tne kind invitation received from the Secretary of the Society to present a communication on the genus Aster came during a protracted journey. Up toa late date it appeared possible for the writer to be present at the meeting, and supplement these notes by verbal statements and by the exhibition of illustrative specimens. Official duties, however, render this impossible, and the paper is sent in its present form as an indication of his great THE,.GENUS ASTER. 5 - interest in the Society, and to be made the basis of discussion regarding certain practical aspects of the subject. | The present communication will be confined to a consideration of those American species of the genus Aster which can be regarded as promising subjects for improvement and cultivation. Jt is an interesting fact that some of the American species in this genus are known to science chiefly through descriptions of their cultivated forms. For instance, Dr. Asa Gray says Aster versicolor, Willd.,is ‘‘common in European gardens, doubiless from Atlantic North America, but decisive indigenous specimens are hardly known.” (Gray, ‘‘ Synopt. Flora,” vol. ii., p. 194.) Aster patulus, Lam., ‘‘ chiefly known in cultivation,” is another case in point, as are also the following: Aster diffusus, Ait., var. horizontalis, ‘‘a plant of the gardens, not exactly matched by indigenous specimens,”’ and Aster Novi-Belgi, L., var. levigatus, of which it is said that there are “hardly any wild specimens exactly answering to the plant cultivated and even naturalized in Europe.” Aster Novi-Belgu, L., var. liioreus, has been known in European gardens from early times, under different names, all of the descriptions upon which the synonyms were based being from cultivated plants. Examination of these and other similar cases shows that confusion has arisen from the changes which the plants undergo from even the slight degree of cultivation associated with raising them from seed in a garden. In many, if not most, of the cases there has been an improvement in those features which most eommend themselves to horticulturists, and in a few instances the plants may be reckoned among established favourites. It seems highly probable that this list might be considerably increased. In reviewing the American species which may be available for horticultural purposes, we are fortunate in possessing an admirable monograph by the great botanist, the late Asa Gray, of Harvard College, in which the morphological and geographical relations of the constituents of the genus are clearly set forth. It is the design of this communication to make an analysis of Dr. Asa Gray’s monograph which may be somewhat helpful to horticulturists. If this brief sketch can aid in making our beautiful American species better known to European cultivators, the writer will feel that he has, in part, discharged the obligation 6 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. which he, in common with all American lovers of flowers, owes to the Royal Horticultural Society of Great Britain. The following statistics may be of interest before we enter on the task of analysing Dr. Gray’s work. The genus Aster comprises 200 species. These are found — chiefly in the northern hemisphere, particularly in North America, where about 120 of them occur. Europe and Asia share nearly all the rest, while Australasia is said to possess none. The order to which the Asters belong is the largest among flowering plants, comprising one-tenth of all flowering plants, and about one-eighth of those which occur in North America. The Asteroid tribe includes the Golden-reds and true Daisies, and many genera which have only a few species each; in some genera there is only a single species. That which it most con- cerns us to know with regard to the relatives of the Asters is the capability of the most closely allied genera for improvement. On the one side we find Sericocarpus, a genus of rather unattractive low herbs with small heads; on the other side stand the species of Erigeron, or Fleabane, a few of which are rather showy and Aster-like, with broad ray-flowers. Botanically speaking, the differences between the Fleabanes and the Asters are very slight, no natural lines of demarcation existing. Dr. Gray divides our American species into thirteen sub- genera, arranged under two heads, based on their lease of life. The first series comprises the perennials, and has ten subgenera ;. the second includes the biennials and annuals, and has three subgenera. But even at the outset thereisan anomaly, showing, as every part of the genus abundantly demonstrates, that one cannot draw hard and fast lines: the species A. coloradoensis is apparently perennial, but in all other particulars it is closely related to the section which contains annuals and biennials. The distinction is biological rather than morphological. The sections or subgenera grade into each other in a manner which forbids the establishing of any precise limits, and the same is true of the species themselves. The latter are connected in many cases by intermediate forms which conceal from view all lines of demarcation. We may go one step farther, and say that almost every species has varieties which at one time or the other have laid claim to being considered of the rank of true species. Of course these statements may be applied with little THE GENUS ASTER. Tf change to almost any of the large genera of flowering plants, but they are of importance from a practical point of view when we consider the capabilities of any given group for improvement under cultivation. Moreover, the existence of such intermediate forms renders possible the application. of that most valuable of all horticultural aids—hybridisation. Although its use is by no means confined to the large genera, it is in these rather than in the small genera that the process has been most uniformly suc- cessful. Nature herself has taken this matter in hand in the ( SAL peer.) 4'\ } aN is aN Vise DN dele SNS YA aye ys - Oval WW ex RR SU COV UA MUNSPAOATN\Y \y SEN Fic. 1.—Aster aupinus. (From the Dictionary of Gardening.) genus Aster, and given us hybrids which, however perplexing they may be to the systematist, are full of promise to the experi- mental physiologist and horticulturist. The first American subgenus, Amellastrum, contains a single species, A. alpinus (fig. 1), which, like many other plants of high altitudes and latitudes, is found also in the colder regions of other continents. The second subgenus, Megalastrum, has two large-flowered species, both belonging to the hills of our South-west. The long rays would make these species of interest in an experimental garden were it not for the peculiar conditions —namely, those of a dryish country—under which they occur. 8 JOURNAL OF FHE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. Heleastrum, the next subgenus, has three species of the south-eastern coast, all growing in what we know in the Atlantic States as Pine-barrens. The sterile soil of these barrens nur- tures some of the most interesting plants of our American Flora, as is well shown by the long list of New Jersey plants. But experience shows that these children of neglect are by no means amenable to ordinary culture. Some of the Pine-barren plants which thrive under very adverse circumstances in their forbid- ding home do not thrive at all when we transfer them to our gardens and houses. A few of them succeed remarkably well, a few only indifferently, and some are hopeless from the very out- set. It is impossible to state beforehand whether given plants - from our sandy woods will bear change or not; we find that the only way is to try the experiment where there is promise of good results. In the present instance, the small size of the flowers of the species of the section would render the experiment hardly worth the while. . Hesperastrum has a single species from the high mountains of ‘California; Biotia, two species from the woodlands of Canada extending as far south even as Georgia, but in our Southern States only in the higher mountains. These two species delight in shade, and form a pretty garden ornament under thickets, but neither has any great claim to horticultural consideration. ' The next subgenus, Aster proper, comprises no less than seventy-four well-marked species, together with no end of varieties and probable hybrids. Taking the more promising of these in the order adopted by Dr. Gray, we notice first A. Hervey, which resembles A. macrophyllus of the last group and A. spectabilis of this. One of its forms has been long in cultiva- tion under other names, especially Biota conmuxta and Hurybia commuxta. It flowers in the gardens of the Atlantic coast in late summer. The rays are of reddish violet. A. spectabilis, one of its nearest congeners, is generally a little brighter in colour, and blends well with it in groups. There are few finer masses of violet than our wild plants of these and the associated species as they are grouped together on the borders of woods. Passing over a few species which are attractive from a botanical point of view, we come to the superb species A. Curtisi2, which grows in rather dry soil, in woodlands, in the Alleghany Mountains. The whole plant is generally smooth, always so in THE GENUS ASTER. ; 9 the typical form, and has the large deep violet flowers clustered in very loose panicles. There is little doubt that attentive search ean find a more compact form which will be more desirable as a garden variety. Omitting certain species which are from our far and middle West, we come to one of the handsomest plants of the whole section, namely, A. Nove-Anglie. The rays are very numerous and of a charming brilliancy of colour, whether we have the variety with rose or with purple flowers. The rose- coloured variety is a true race, coming true from seed for the most part. Individuals which have been under cultivation for a long period do not show the least tendency to lose their peculiar bright rose. When well grown this plant attains a height of ten feet, and is conspicuous for its highly leafy character. Its strength and marked individuality would indicate this as an excellent species to serve as the basis for hybridising experiments. The next species to be mentioned in this short list is one with firm, nearly entire leaves, mostly smooth, and with showy heads, the rays light purple or violet. This is A. Shortii, and belongs to the woodland banks of Kentucky, although extending far beyond these limits. It has long been a favourite in the Harvard University garden, where its next neighbour is a species with deep purple flowers. Associated with this are other species with petioled heart-shaped leaves, such as undulatus, cordifolius, Drummondii, and sagittifolius, all of which are widely diffused... By far the largest group in this subgenus comprises the species with root-leaves which taper more or less, in no case heart- shaped and petioled, except in the interesting and obscure inter- mediate forms occasionally met with. These latter species are classified by Dr. Gray around the types A. levis, A. ericoides, A. multiflorus, and the remainder in two classes, Divergentes and Vulgares. A. levis is allied to the garden plant A. versicolor and the South-western species, twrbinellus and virgatus. Intermediate forms connect levis and virgatus. A. ericoides varies widely, but generally has rather small heads ; A. polyphyllus of the same group has showy heads and has long been known in gardens. All of the epecies in the foregoing alliances seem likely to improve under cultivation. The great change which takes place in some individuals of ericoides is in 10 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. the direction of augmented size, but not, so far as the writer has observed, in better colour. The next alliance, clustered around A. multiflorus, our most widely diffused species, contains only one which has been much known in gardens, namely, A. amethystinus, which has been called A. pilosus and bostoniensis. In the group of Divergentes there are three species which vary in many ways, namely, dumosius, vimineus, and diffusus. One of the varieties of the latter is a favourite in cultivation. The group Vulgares, a large alliance, takes all the rest of the members of the section. The first species in Dr. Gray’s list has been ‘‘ cultivated from earliest days in European gardens,” and in some places on the Continent it has shown a tendency to escape and establish itself in open places and by roadsides. The larger and beautiful A. Novi-Belgw has been cultivated both in the old world and in the new, and some of its varieties are favourites. Many other species closely allied to this are found in the West, three Atlantic species representing the alliance in the East. The latter are A. tardiflorus, prenanthoides, and puniceus, with its varieties. A. puniceus is conspicuous for its wide range of colour. We pass next to the subgenus Erigerastrum, haying two Alaskan species which need not for our purpose be further men- tioned, and to the two subgenera Deellingeria and lanthe, among ‘which are placed the species formerly assigned by Torrey and Gray to Dipplopappus. Some of these are pretty, but are hardly of horticultural interest. The subgenus Orthomeris has a simple pappus, and comprises some of our most widely spread species. Many of them are mountain and swamp plants, presenting peculiar difficulties in cultivation. Of the remaining subgenera, Oxytripolium, Conyzopsis, and Macheranthera, we are inclined to single out only A. Bigelovit for special mention. This is a beautiful plant, having a wide range of variation and susceptible of immediate improvement in a rich garden. Incidentally, attention has been called to the distribution of some of the species in these different subgenera; allusion must now be made to some practical considerations based thereon. The habitat of a plant is by no means a sure guide as to the soul, exposure, and treatment which it should receive in a garden. THE GENUS ASTER. IIL Everyone is aware of the ridiculous mistakes which are some- times made when new plants are introduced to notice: some- times reasonably hardy plants have been treated as tender, and tender plants have been subjected to severer weather than they ever had in their former home. These mistakes are due to the well-known fact that in a given climate the local conditions may make all the difference in the world; in the tropics, for instance, in the high lands of Ceylon, one can see English plants thriving as if they were in Britain, while in hot exposures not many miles away true tropical luxuriance is a noteworthy feature. In America the distance of a few miles sometimes makes a greater difference than that to which I have just referred, and one must take this into account in attempting to judge from its station, as given in the Manuals of Botany, just what place a species must have assigned to it in cultivation. This is particularly the case in such a genus as the Asters, where many of the species in some of their forms are very patient under any kind of treatment, and their immediate congeners are the reverse. Therefore any statements relative to the special stations of these plants must be regarded as hints rather than as directions for horticultural management. At the beginning of the task of describing the range of our American species of Aster we are met by a difficulty which is very hard to meet, namely, the immense size of some of the provinces of the Dominion of Canada and of the States of the Union. For instance, the occurrence of a given species at a few points in the State of Texas entitles it to rank as the denizen of a commonwealth possessing more than 250,000 square miles, considerably larger than Germany or France, and twice as large as all the British Isles taken togetner. The provinces of Ontario and of Quebec are each larger than Italy. When an Aster is said to have a range from Canada to Florida, it may extend through twenty-five degrees of latitude; while from Alaska to California there is rather more difference than this. The species which have been indicated in the foregoing com- munication as desirable for cultivation are, as a rule, those which have a wide distribution ; for instance, Aster Nove-Anglie ranges from Canada and Saskatchewan to Carolina and Colorado; Aster Novi-Belgu from New Brunswick to Georgia and westward to Illinois. Surely we have here sufficient difference of climate 12 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. to warrant our confidence in urging the wide cultivation of these and similar species in European countries, particularly in the north. From this hasty analysis of Dr. Gray’s elaboration of his favourite genus it is evident that a considerable number of species are promising subjects for cultivation. They evince an immediate response to better surroundings, except in the case of some of those which prefer a sterile soil. No one can examine the species of this genus as they appear in a ramble through any of the eastern or of the middle portion of what we used to call the West in America without being impressed by the immense number of intermediate forms and of the wide variation in the well-marked species. They display such differences as to assure any horticulturist of a speedy reward from selection alone. But when we add to this the fact that so many of them hybridise spontaneously, giving us stronger plants, although perhaps relatively infertile, it is easy to understand how wide is the field from which a skilful cultivator can choose the material for his work. Lastly, even a cursory examination of the species shows that seographical representatives are everywhere found in this poly- morphous genus. A given species will vary, we will say, in two directions. On one side of the range of this variation will be found a species connected by intermediate forms, and this may serve as the type of extreme divergence on that side and limit. On the other side will be found other forms, and these may be gathered around a type which marks the limit in that direction. It is really curious to see how often a species is bounded by morphological limits which are nearly coincident with geo- graphical ones. The bearings of this on the practical question which this paper has undertaken to present are plain: a study of these geographical relations will in most cases indicate what we can expect for our gardens and point out a method of treat- ment there. With the kindred subject suggested by such a geo- graphical study, namely, as to the probable point of origin of the American Asters, the present paper cannot deal. It is reserved for another time and place. ‘THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. 13 ‘THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. By the Rev. C. WonuEy Dop, M.A., P.R.H.S. BeEForE reading the notes which I have written on this subject, I must say that some of the specific names to which the committee appointed to examine the Chiswick collection of Michaelmas Daisies have assigned certain garden forms, have to-day taken me rather by surprise. I do not here question their accuracy, but may remark that perhaps the decisions come to may not prove final; and without intending the slightest disparagement to botanical science, I may say that botanists and gardeners alike seem doubtful about the history and parentage of some of the most ornamental forms. Up to this day I retained all the specific names given on the authority cf Kew about three years ago; some of these have now been changed, and others declared to be uncertain. When tall Phloxes and perennial Sunflowers are on the wane in gardens, Michaelmas Daisies become conspicuous, and later, when the first frosts of October have disfigured Dahlias and Heliotropes, the colours of these hardy plants become brighter, and the flowers seem to derive new vigour from the cold nights, being reminded by them of their native home on the North American prairies, to which a large proportion of them belong. Any flowers which carry on the gaiety of a garden nearly into winter ought to be carefully encouraged ; and though the Michaelmas Daisy cannot compete either in brightness of colour or in size of flower with the Chrysanthemum, still it ornaments many a flower border in which its less hardy rivals would never open their buds at all; and though there are few gardens in which it has not yet found a place, there are still fewer in which it is made as much of as it deserves to be. The habit of Michaelmas Daisies is so various that one cannot speak about it in general terms. From the tallest, Aster wmbellatus, growing eight or nine feet high, to the dwarf nondescript, probably belonging to a form or hybrid of A. versicolor, rising scarcely to a height of as many inches, every gradation in stature is easily found; and from A. Amellus or A. dwmosus, which from a small base spread to a width equal to their height, to those which make a narrow umbel of flowers 14 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. only at the summit, there is no definite line of distinction. Others, though tall, flower quite down to the ground. Some run at the base so provokingly that they must have great compensating merit to save them from the rubbish heap. But enough has been said to show that we can tell nothing of the habit of Michaelmas Daisies which is true of the whole class, except that they continue to flower when nearly all other flowers in our gardens are over. Perhaps the weakest point about them is their colour, or rather their want of colour. Different shades of dull purple are too THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. 15 prevalent ; good clear blue is almost unknown; pure white is scarce, and in most cases soon becomes tinged with purple ; the tints to be found are seldom gay and bright. As the subject of these notes is Michaelmas Daisies, we must try to define the name. The same plant may flower in Fic. 3.—ASTER ACRIS. @ rom ie Gar ae Magazine.) August in the warm gardens of the South or West of England, whilst in the North it will not open a bud before October. I pro- pose then to fix no limits of lateness, but to exclude early kinds of Aster which in the Midland Counties are generally over before the middle of September. Ineed_not say that perennial Aster 16 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. and Michaelmas Daisy are not convertible terms. For instance, none of us would call A. alpinus (fig. 1, p. 7) and A. Thomsont Michaelmas Daisies, though both are very ornamental garden plants. On the other hand, all Michaelmas Daisies are now in- cluded in the genus Aster, except three or four good kinds which belong to Boltonia. I will mention by name a few of the good early Asters which are hardly Michaelmas Daisies, and should not be selected to take part in an October display. A. puniceus (fig. 2), a variable kind with large slate-coloured flowers, and another white form, and A. pyreneus, with large pale blue flowers and rather ragged and distorted rays—a plant which has narrowly missed being first-class—both of them come out before the wealth of summer flowers is over, and would be more welcome a voonth later than they are in August. Next there are the doubtfully named varieties of the subgenus Galatella, one of which, four or five feet high, commonly called Aster acris (fig. 3), is an excellent border plant when well cultivated, but hardly late enough to be a Michaelmas Daisy. Two dwarfs of the same season deserve mention; one of them, perhaps the nearest approach to blue in this class, and named 4. spectabilis, grows about eighteen inches high, has an excellent free habit and a good flower with a golden disc, but is generally over by the middle of September. Another early dwarf of merit is A. corymbosus (fig. 4), generally, but not always, with black wiry stalks, much branched, and abounding with small white starry flowers. These five which I have enumerated are all good species and good border flowers, but generally too early to be included in an October display. I have omitted to speak of those which I have not found ornamental, whether early or late. With the exception of A. acris, the other four names are well- defined and undisputed. But when we come to the mass of later-flowering Daisies it is difficult to define them either by botanical name or by any other character. Name is no gua- rantee of merit, because we find good and bad included in one species ; it is no indication of time of flowering, because in some—A. Nove-Anglie, for instance—we have comparatively early varieties, and others so late that in a backward season they do not reach flowering at all in my garden. We cannot infer height or habit from name, because in some, say in A. versicolor, botanists have set down to one species forms from six feet high THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. Ve io six inches. So in speaking of Michaelmas Daisies as garden plants it ought to be known that specific names, even though correct, may be very misleading. When we are told that perennial Asters comprise between three and four hundred botanical names of species and varieties, it seems hard that even these names may be correctly given without fixing the characters of the flower from a florist’s point of view. Perhaps, therefore, these botanical names had better be ignored by gardeners in this class, unless accompanied by some recognised fancy name, ZZ izes Fic. 4,—AsTER coryMBosus. (From the Dictionary of Gardening.) because there are few about which botanists are agreed as to the type of the species. inet However, the number of botanical species which include all the most ornamental Michaelmas Daisies is not large, perhaps about one-tenth or less of the whole genus. i have been pro- posing to myself to limit the number of varieties I cultivate to fifty, and these probably would not be found io belong to more than twenty species at most. A good many of them seem to be garden hybrids, perhaps of doubtful parentage, but it matters little to gardeners whether a good flower is a ood species or not. Before enumerating the probable species amongst which the c 18° JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. fifty recommended varieties are to be found, I may first say that for several years I greedily collected from botanic gardens, from nurseries, and private flower-borders every variety of Aster I could find, either with or without names. Probably from two hundred to three hundred forms have flowered in my garden, and half that number of names, some genuine, many unauthorised, have been written on my labels. Next the process of elimination was rapidly but cautiously carried on. To some which I retained I gave fancy names, chiefly for my own convenience, often adopt- ing the name of the giver, so that some Asters have become popular with a name which was never intended to go beyond the limits of my garden walls; others, apparently variations of one species, I distinguished by numbers, so the naming of my col- lection has never laid claim to any authority ; but it seemed to me that any fancy name was better than a misapplied botanical name. It must also be remarked that there is so much room for the exercise of different tastes in selection from the endless varieties of this genus, that all gardeners should exercise for themselves a free choice, both in the number and the kinds to be adopted. The mutual interest in gardens would be greatly increased if we could see a different set of Michaelmas Daisies in each garden. Cultural conditions, too, may make corresponding variations in ornamental qualities, and the warm sandy soils of Surrey may develop merits in a plant which the cold clay of Cheshire fails to show. For instance, A. sericeus and A. ptar- micotdes (fig. 5), which are highly spoken of by some, fail entirely in my garden. But to return to the proposed fifty, the selection must be taken as very general and capable of contraction or expansion- It is difficult to know how to class the plants, but it is roughly done according to their height as they grow in the retentive soil at Edge Hall. Of kinds which exceed five feet, I cultivate A. wmbellatus, the tallest of all, and spreading its branches elegantly, but without merit in colour or individual flower ; next come two or three tall garden forms, probably of A. Novi-Belgii, of which one which I call Robert Parker, after the worthy nurseryman of Tooting from whom I obtained it, is perhaps the best; two or three of Nove-Angli@, one with pink flowers exceed- ing six feet; there is a tall type of A. versicolor, now perhaps to be superseded by improved seedlings ; and in the heart-leaved. THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. 19 section there is A. Drummondii. Then come the mass of Michaelmas Daisies from five to three feet high. Many of the best of these are classed amongst A. Novi-Belgii, and are variable Fie. 5—.ASTER PTARMICOIDES. (From the Gardeners’ Chronicle.) (The magnified figures represent (1) the margin of a leaf, (2) echinate pollen grains, and (3) a ray-floret with pappus.) in colour as well asin height; A. twrbinellus in its best form is excellent, and what is now classed as the type of A. levis, with larger leayes and smaller flowers, has hitherto been mixed C2 20 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. with it. Several good forms seem to range betiveen A. levis, A. Novi-Belgu, and A. Curtisu. Two or three of cordi- folius are not surpassed in abundance of flowers and elegance of growth, the best of all being one hitherto known in my garden as Photograph, a name justly objected to by my friends, and which I have proposed to change to Diana. Other good flowers for this row are A. polyphyllus and its allies, perhaps the nearest approach to pure white; two or three good Boltonias, one generally called in nurseries A. japonicus, now to be called B. mcisa; two or three coming under B. asteroides of Asa Gray, a species including, as many do, both good and bad, the best forms having large pink flowers and being formerly known as B. glastifolia; A. amethystinus, with dense little bright flowers, should not be omitted, nor should the best forms of A. versicolor, known hitherto in gardens as A. discolor major, plants of high merit. Of those below three feet, by far the best belong to the Amellus group. As these are often raised from seed, and vary a little, the selection of them should be carefully made. Another, A. dwmosus,is very distinct in habit. A. ericoides (fig. 6) varies, but contains neat and elegant varieties. A. Short, in the heart-leaved class, has eood qualities. There is a good and floriferous pink Aster, long wrongly called in catalogues A. longifolius formosus, and A. horizontals, very persistent in lateautumn. Last to be men- tioned as late flowers are two excellent dwarfs which compete for the name of A. hybridus nanus. One belongs to A. versicolor, and is quite prostrate in habit ; the other, with pale rosy-purple flowers, is of very doubtful parentage, but both deserve to be in every garden, and must have names assigned which are no longer ambiguous, as the two plants are very distinct. This enumera- tion must be taken as indicating the direction in which good Asters are to be looked for rather than as laying down any rule. Above all, I repeat, let the selection be made by sight, and do not trust names. As for cultivation, every Michaelmas Daisy should be erown by reference to its ascertained habit. As far as my experience goes, good and rich soil suits them all. I am shy of any which run at the base; but if such are grown, they must be replanted annually, and replanting is far better than cutting round them. This annual division suits a good many THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. 91 of the class, especially A. Novi-Belgu, A. levis, and their kind. In this class small detached pieces, showing in spring only two or three shoots, make by autumn the best plants and have the finest flowers. They must neither be crowded by haying other plants too near them, nor have the stalks too close on each plant, because to be shown in good condition they must Fic. 6.—ASTER ERICOIDES. (From the Dictionary of Gardening.) have room to flower freely on each branch down to the lowest. Experience alone will teach the best way to treat each kind. The best time for dividing all of them is as soon as spring growth begins. This may be in January or may be in March, according to the season, but the young shoots should be active and not more than aninch above grourd. It is notall that are 22, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. better for annual division; those of the Amellus section may go on untouched for three or four years or more. Close-growing kinds like A. Nove-Anglie and A. cordifolius soon exhaust the soil beneath them, and if not divided want a rich top-dressing in spring. As for where and in what company to grow these plants, different writers have laid down very different and very arbitrary rules. One says they ought only to be grown in wild shrubberies, where they may lean against the shrubs, so as not to require tying. Others, who know that any attempt they might themselves make to grow them in this way would end in their falling over and being smothered by nettles and docks, advise growing them in a special border, and staking them all carefully. No absolute rules should be given, as different modes suit different surrounding conditions. In my garden | grow them mixed with other plants in the herbaceous borders, and elsewhere in lots of thirty or forty lunds arranged and graduated together, but all supported by tying, which is an absolute neces- sity with me. When flower-buds begin to form, those in the _ mixed borders, which have previously been loosely tied to one rod, are tied out to several short and not conspicuous iron rods, and the branches spread so as to make them cover as much breadth as the flowers will fill. In this way a border which till August was quite full of other flowers may be made to appear in October quite full of Michaelmas Daisies. Some kinds deserve an isolated treatment to display them to their best advantage. I have one of doubtful parentage which I have hitherto called Ledbury, raised from seed and given to me by Mr. Grant, of that town. This, if well cultivated, and provided with plenty of side room, branches widely and horizontally, and flowers in drooping masses down to the very ground, in the form of a well-grown Holly-bush. This, if sheltered from high winds, which easily break it, has of all Michaelmas Daisies I have ever seen the best habit ; but it would be comparatively worthless if crowded. Cultivators of these plants should know that the young leaves of many kinds are a favourite food of slugs. Those which break at the base whilst still in flower attract these marauders most, as affording a prospect of food during the mild days of winter. The slugs hide below the crowns, and if not prevented go on eating the young growth in spring till the plant perishes, and the loss is often ignorantly attributed to frost. There are parts of THE MICHAELMAS DAISY AS A GARDEN PLANT. | 93 -my garden where neither Pyrethrums nor Delphiniums nor Asters will flourish as perennials unless the slugs are. checked by dressing the crowns with lime and soot in autumn. Some of these Asters are liable to a disease which also spoils many perennial Sunflowers and Rudbeckias. Half or all the plant suddenly withers when in flower. It may be due to hot WZ Fic. 7.—Astrr AMELLUS BESSARABICUS. (From the Dictionary of Gardening.) sun following heavy rain, and I call it sunstroke for want of a better name. A. cordifoliusis often killed by it, except when planted in shade. As for the future of the Michaelmas Daisy, it will be gathered from what has been said that the best of them have probably ‘been produced by development in English gardens; the way to 24 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. improve them, therefore, is to continue growing them from seed. All do not ripen seed alike.