Full text of "Bulletin of the American Iris Society"

See other formats

mi z

BULLETIN

OF THE

American Iris Society

APRIL, 1934

NO. 51

Editor, R. S. STURTEVANT

CONTENTS

Comment and Remark .

Bearded Irises. Notes on Proportion, Form, etc., F. Wynn Welling &

Irises in Iowa, Mrs. C. G. Whiting .

II. M., A.M., D.M., Digby Legard .

Science Series No. 13, Pollen Tube Behavior in Iris, Willis Chase .

Seed Sowing, Boy W. Gottschall .

Edible Irises, B. S. Sturt evant .

Virginia Notes, 1933, Mrs. W. W. Gibbs .

Iris Memories, Edward Salbach .

Varietal Notes, Mrs. Edgar Wires .

Dutch Irises of Merit .

Backgrounds, B. S. Sturtevant . .

Species Notes, Photographs by Lady Collet

Iris Korollcowi .

Iris chrysographes .

Iris missouriensis . .

Iris foliosa .

The Family Tree, Whites, Sydney B. Mitchell .

To Read or Not to Read, New Gardens for Old .

Ask Me Another, Iris Rot, I)r. W. W. Everett .

Tid-Bits 34th

Winter Injury, A. W. Mackenzie, Indiana .

Commercial Practice .

Iris Albispiritus .

Notes from a New England Garden .

Iris dichotoma .

From a Maryland Garden .

From Southern California .

The Little Widow . . . .

Iris in Design .

48
4S

49
51

58
60
60
61
65

Published Quarterly by

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY, 1918 HARFORD AVE., BALTIMORE, MD.

Entered as second-class matter January, 1934, at the Post Office at Baltimore, Md.,

under the Act of March 3, 1879.

?3.00 the Year — 50 Cents Copy for Members

Directors :

OFFICERS 1933

Term

expiring

1934:

Sherman R. Duffy

Mrs. W. H. Peckham

R. S. Sturtevant

Term

expiring

1935:

Mrs. J. Edgar Hires

John C. Wister

Term

expiring

1936:

Dr. H. H. Everett

Dr. J. H. Kirkland

J. B. Wallace, Jr.
Richardson Wright

President — John C. Wister, Wister St. and Clarkson Avenue, Germantown,
Philadelphia, Pa.

Vice-President — Dr. H. H. Everett, 1104 Sharp Bldg., Lincoln, Nebr.

Acting Secretary — Mr. John H. Ferguson, 1918 Harford Ave., Baltimore, Md.

Treasurer — Richardson Wright, House & Garden, Graybar Bldg., New York
City.

Regional Vice-Presidents —

1. Mr. Wm. J. McKee, 48 Kenwood Ave., Worcester, Mass.

2. Col. J. C. Nicholls, 114 Overton Rd., Ithaca, N. Y.

3. M. E. Douglas, Rugby Place, Woodbury, N. J.

4. J. Marion Shull, 208 Raymond St., Chevy Chase, Md.

5. Mrs. James R. Bachman, 2646 Alston Drive, Atlanta, Ga.

6. W. A. Payne, Box 685, Terre Haute, Ind.

7. C. P. Connell, 2001 Grand Ave., Nashville, Tenn.

8. Robert Schreiner, R. 1, Riverview Station, St. Paul, Minn.

9. Euclid Snow, R. F. D. 2, Hinsdale, Ill.

10. Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs, 3715 Turtle Creek Blvd., Dallas, Texas.

11. David C. Petrie, R. F. D. 2, Boise, Idaho.

12. Dr. P. A. Loomis, Colorado Springs, Colo.

13. Carl Starker, Jennings Lodge, Ore.

14. Prof. E. O. Essig, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.

15. William Miles, Ingersoll, Ontario, Canada.

Chairmen of Committees:

Scientific — Dr. A. E. Waller, 233 So. 17th St., Columbus, Ohio.

Election — Dr. C. Stuart Gager, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Membership and Publicity — Dr. H. II. Everett, 1104 Sharp Bldg., Lin¬
coln, Neb.

Registration — C. E. F. Gersdorff, 1825 No. Capitol St., Washington, D. C.

Test Garden 8C Display Garden — Mrs. W. II. Peckham, The Lodge,
Skylands Farm, Sterlington, N. Y.

Exhibition — Mrs. W. L. Karcher, 1011 W. Stephenson St., Freeport, Ill.
Bibliography — Mrs. W. H. Peckham.

Awards — Dr. H. H. Everett.

Editor — R. S. Sturtevant, Groton, Mass.

Editorial Boat'd :

S. R. Duffy
Mrs. J. E. Hires

B. Y. Morrison
R. S. Sturtevant

LANTERN SLIDES— Rental Fee (to members) #10.00. Apply to Mrs.
K. H. Leigh, Mo. Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Mo.

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2019 with funding from
BHL-SIL-FEDLINK

https://archive.org/details/bulletinofameric5154unse

IRIS ALBISPIRITUS

Reprinted by permission of the New York Botanical
(iarden; The American Horticultural Society and The
American Iris Society cooperating.

LIBRARY
NEW YORK
BOTANICAL
GARDEN

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY

COMMENT AND REMARK

■ “I wonder if we are to branch out in many ways, if it would
be well to include in the Bulletin a column of first class beauty
hints, some good cooking recipes, and some good sound advice
to the lovelorn and heartsick. Someway the matter continues to
remind me of the old hen that persisted in setting on the door
knob. She did not know her limitations.”

And such is the reaction of at least one member to our January
Bulletin which your apparently misguided Editor had con¬
sidered unusually fine. Knowing said member I immediately
seek out a recipe and remind you of the extensive use of orris
root in beauty preparations without number.*

The above member was one of the six who did appreciate our
efforts and together they represent perhaps a 600% increase in
letters of commendation (or condemnation — we like both).

Perhaps advice to the “heartsick” might be to those who grow
iris commercially and seek to protect originators in maintaining
for at least a year or two the introduction price. The “Market¬
ing Agreement and Supplementary Code of Fair Competition
for Nurserymen” has now been formulated and awaits approval
under the NRA. It is sincerely hoped that the iris growers
will gather for discussion at the Annual Meeting at Lincoln,
Nebraska, in May. The “Open Price” clause of the agreement
is of especial interest.

With the unusually bitter and continued cold in many sec¬
tions of the country records of hardiness will be extremely valu¬
able this spring and it is perhaps fortunate that, in following
the recommendations of the Award Committee as to zoning, the
new committee will have current experience well in mind.

That 95% of our varieties are hardy and perhaps 80% regular
in flowering in most sections it must be remembered that many
of the most beautiful start growth too early in the spring and
that the buds are frozen all too frequently. We welcome reports.

The Editor.

Special Publication. Antoine Chires Co., 147 Waverley Place, N. Y. City. Report
of the International Iris Conference, 1922 Also Bulletin No. 3.

[1]

BEARDED IRISES. NOTES ON PROPORTION, FORM, ETC.

F. Wynn Hellings

Note. Originally published in “Gardening Illustrated ’ 1 and republished in
the “The Iris Year Book, 1933,” it seemed well worth the attention of
all our members. Similar discussions of characteristics and points in irises
will be found in our Bulletins 2, 6, 10, and 15. I was glad to find that
Mr. Wellings uses many of the descriptive terms found on the Data Card
in use by our Society in its published descriptions. — Editor.

■ The idea of the desirability, equally with the inevitability, of
an ideal when considering proportion and form in connection
with Irises is forced upon the honest Iris lover and student, al¬
though any attempt to impose rigid canons of perfection must
be sedulously watched and thwarted. Co-existent with the recog¬
nition of the ideal must be an ungruding acknowledgment of
the existence of many manifestations of beauty in which some
of the attributes of the ideal are lacking or only imperfectly
achieved.

There is room for more than one type of Bearded Iris. The
simple sturdy Ambassadeur can maintain its place equally with
the elegant, graceful Aphrodite, the gently waved outline of
Micheline Charraire and the highly-decorative standards of
Ophelia and Lohengrin will probably have as many admirers
as the classically severe outlines of Princess Beatrice, the low-
growing Sapphire (Sapphid. A.I.S. name.) can keep its place
in front of the tall Purissima, the crinkled beauty of Sw^eet Lav¬
ender will not be discarded because Anne Marie Cayeux is
smooth as a baby’s cheek, and the single-flowered cJiamaeiris will
co-exist with the profusely-branched Homan. There cannot be,
there must not be, any stereotyping of one form as the only
manifestation of excellence.

The (superficial) interest of the non-gardener and the begin¬
ner is probably in colour alone, but only a single step separates
the beginner from the student. The lover of the iris early
begins to notice points other than colour, such as texture, sub¬
stance, and branching habit, and, sooner or later, he develops
into the earnest student of the flower. He finds interest in seek¬
ing the best, and, developing into a critic and an idealist, cannot
fail to make his contribution to the evolution of a standard of

[21

perfection by dissemination of his opinions, either by the oral
or the written word, and eventually the aggregation of individual
appreciations becomes a collective opinion which determines the
ideal for the time being.

That this evolutionary process has been going on is testified by
Sir Arthur Hort, who says, “Whereas a large proportion of the
tall Bearded Irises which were grown a generation ago had small
and rather shapeless flowers, of nondescript colouring, one sees
now a multitude of tall, stately plants, many of them with finely-
branched stems to show off the flowers. Moreover, the individual
blooms are for the most part beautifully shaped, with well-held
standards and falls.” That the evolutionary process is still going
on was testified by such a keen observer as the late American
irisarian, F. X. Schreiner, who expressed his admiration for the
way in which “the English growers are championing the idea
of poise, shape, branching, as highly important and finally deter¬
mining factors of the value of a variety.”

Proportion and Form

Proportion is concerned with the stem and its branches, and
includes balance and poise (Dykes described poise as “grace of
bearing”). It covers all points bearing on the relation of one
part of the stem to another part and to the whole. Form is a
separate characteristic and mainly concerns the individual flower,
but inasmuch as it offers itself to the eye at the same time as
proportion in its application to the stem, it cannot be dissociated
from proportion in any study of the latter. The study of pro¬
portion and form is, however, profoundly affected when one
comes to consider mass effect, which is not dependent upon the
ideal in its application to the individual show spike but on (1)
colour — which is a matter of personal taste, determined by the
physical equipment of the observer, (2) background — trees and
shrubs, contiguity of other Irises or other flowers, positional ef¬
fect as regards the setting sun, etc., and (3) visibility, e.g., the
emergence of the flower from the foliage of the plant. A bed of
Peau Rouge or Cluny or La Neige, with their grossly over¬
crowded flower-heads, or a bed of Isoline, with its ugly, narrow,
strap-like falls, may, in the right setting, have as good or almost
as good a mass effect as a bed of Marjorie Tinley or Alcazar or
Evelyn Benson.

[3]

The general question of the symmetry of the spike may be
viewed either from the garden standpoint or as a feature of the
show table. For mass planting even such an important character¬
istic as branching is more or less subordinated to the colour effect,
but on the show table it is essential that the stalk be well and
widely branched and the flowers so placed and poised that they
give a balanced effect. Let us debate the ideal first as far as
regards the flower set up as a specimen. The stem should not
be too stout for the size of the individual flowers, or to put it
in reverse, the flower should not appear small considering the
thickness of the stem. When gazing at Ambassadeur, much as we
admire that noble variety, there is always an uneasy consciousness
that it is not really necessary to have such stoutness of stem to
carry the flower. Again, the stem should be tall, short or medium
according to (1) the height of the foliage; (2) the size of the
flower; (3) its own thickness; (4) the length of its branches.
Judged by this criterion, Dominion and some of its derivatives
are too short in the stem, and the somewhat dumpy appearance of
some varieties, e.g., KocJiii, is due to the flower stems not stand¬
ing clear of the foliage.

Looking at it from another aspect, the stem must be stout
enough in its build and attachment to withstand wind without
breaking or bending, and yet not so stout as to be deficient in
grace or to incur any suspicion of coarseness. Asia fails lament¬
ably in the essential of ability when full grown to carry its
flower-stalk erect in all weathers. Very great care must be exer¬
cised, however, in appraising an Iris on this count, because a
stem which is very stout may be so surrounded by bold, luxuriant
foliage and carry such large flowers, that the general effect lacks
nothing of the artistic ; for instance, the stately magnificence of
such a flower as Depute Nomblot is probably as satisfying to the
artistic eye as is the airy, fairy grace of Aphrodite. Another
falling away from the ideal may occur if the stem is so slender
that it seems almost too refined for the size of the flowers, as is
the case with B. Y. Morrison. Secondly, the stem should be well
branched, that is, have three or five, etc., branches according
to its own height, and the branches should be symmetrically
placed, as in Lady Foster, Purissima and Depute Nomblot. The
individual branch must not be too short so that the flowers are
packed close to the stem, as in Mystic, nor placed too low down,

[4]

as in Moa and Mrs. Robert Emmet. A clear stem for a third
or a half of the height seems to be called for to lift the flower
well up from its surrounding foliage. If the branching starts
too low down, aphylla-like, giving the candelabra effect so much
admired in America, there is a loss of dignity and, to my eye, an
utter lack of proportion. On the other hand, if the branching
does not begin until near the top of the spike there will be that
serious defect, a crowded, canna-like appearance of the spike.
Such well-known varieties as La Neige, Peau Rouge, Lohengrin,
Dejazet and Duke of York furnish examples in varying degree
of this undesirable trait. The two extremes of branching are to
be found in the E. H. Jenkins type, with its many and long
branches, the lower of which are themselves branched again (prob¬
ably trojana blood), and the Stanley H. White type (perhaps of
cypriana origin), where the branching is at the top only and
the flowers consequently are almost on an even plane. The only
good thing to be said for the latter type is that it has value
for mass planting, although it is not even the best type for that
purpose.

The branches should be carried at an angle of about 45 deg.,
more or less, as in trojana , Alcazar, Lord of June, Mrs. H. F.
Bowles and Cardinal, and at regular intervals, although the
flower of the topmost branch may very well be comparatively
close to the crown flower so as to take its place as a symmetrical
apex to the spike when the crown flower goes off. A zig-zag stem
(fortunately not common) is considered to be a defect in the
specimen flower, although it matters little or nothing in mass
planting. Examples are True Charm and Cygnet.

Before proceeding to that part of the subject which is con¬
cerned with form, we must deal with several connecting links
between proportion and form. We have already seen that the
size of the flower affects proportion in the stem ; too large or
too small a flower destroys in detail the symmetry of the spike.
Several of the pumilas and chamaeiris (e.g., cyanea) and some
of the species (e.g., arenaria) , valuable and attractive as they
are for other reasons, are deplorable from the point of view
of proportion, their squat appearance deriving from the big
flower on a short stem.

Symmetry and poise are affected by the angle placement of
the bud and the opened flower. The bud must not point inwards

[5]

towards the stem (the Dominion tendency), as, in addition to
looking symmetrical, there is frequently with flowers which do
this, a break in the standard segments of the opened flower
where it is cut in two by the stem, and a segment is not in¬
frequently crushed or doubled back on itself.

Form can now be studied. No consideration of size or colour
or anything other than the shape and the effect of the shape en¬
ters into the question.

Close observers have set up a classification of eight differing
forms of the standard, but this is perhaps too meticulous, and
the eight (flat, over-lapping, arching-cupped, conic-arched, cupped
erect, tips adpressed, floppy, domed, over-arched), may con¬
veniently be reduced to five, viz.: (1) flat, (2) arched or domed,
(3) arched open, (4) floppy, (5) adpressed. The flat type, which
is that of the Kaempferi varieties, may be ignored in a study
of the Bearded Irises, except for a passing reference to the
intrusion of that undesirable alien, Clematis. The floppy type is,
of course, frankly deplorable. Not only is it ungraceful in ap¬
pearance, but the floppiness indicates a lack of the substance
which enables a flower not only to stand up and rejoice in the
burning rays of the sun but to emerge triumphantly after rain.
Alas, that Lord of June, that regal beauty, should be the strik¬
ing example of floppiness! Another bad standard is the arched
open type in which the segments do not meet but fall away
from one another and present an appearance as of clutching claws.
In a way this type is worse than the floppy type, because there
are days in the youth of a floppy Iris when it may be acceptable,
but the splaying, open-cupped standard is always and every¬
where unpleasing to the eye. It must, however, be noted that so
competent a judge as Bliss found a compensation in the open
cupped standard when it displays better such a beautiful feature
as the veinings to be found in Merlin, and all of us have doubtless
appreciated the glorious colouring in the heart of Lent A. Wil¬
liamson when it throws itself open in its abandoned way. All of
which rams home the useful lesson that we must not put a
beautiful Iris altogether outside the pale because of its failure
in one respect to reach an academic ideal.

As regards the adpressed type (e.g., Ophelia), there is no fault
of line which condemns it, although it may not appeal to every
eye. Perhaps this is because there is something pinched and tight-

[6]

lipped about its appearance. It is not the generous, open-handed
fellow among Irises! It speaks of miserliness and a grudging
spirit, and is evidently going to ‘‘keep itself to itself.”

In the arching or domed (either just meeting or slightly over¬
lapping) we find our ideal, both from the artistic and the practi¬
cal standpoint. The segments are broad and, as a rule, so solid
that they maintain their erect position throughout the life of
the flower. As a rule there is no lack of substance in Irises of
this type, and we have the satisfaction of knowing when we

look at such a flower in the glory of its first day that we are

going to look at it again tomorrow and the day after.

Another point is that the standards must not be too big in

proportion to the falls. Lord of June sins in this respect.

When we proceed to a critical study of the falls, we are con¬
fronted again with the difficulty of placing certain types under a
ban because their falls fail to comply with the demands of
symmetry. This difficulty concerns the angle at which the falls
stand in relation to the axis of the flower, and it may perhaps
at the outset seem that we are debarred so far as regards the
falls from setting up any standard of perfection at all.

Some varieties (comparatively few) hold their falls practically
horizontally, that is, at right angles to the axis of the flower,
e.g., Col. Candelot, Docteur Chobaut, Santa Barbara and Frieda
Mohr, some have their falls hanging straight down, e.g., W. R.
Dykes and Mount Penn, while others extend them at varying
angles between these two extremes. A sub-division of the straight-
hanging class includes those varieties like Isoline, whose falls
have their tips curving inwards towards the stem. At first there
was no discrimination between these types of falls but individual
preferences and artistic sensibilities came into play and even¬
tually criticism became vocal. The straight-hanging fall is now
condemned by the majority, and the flaring type is becoming
established as the ideal. But in this instance practice cannot keep
pace with theory. There are so many deservedly popular Irises
which have the straight-hanging fall that that form cannot be
ruthlessly put on one side, and, moreover, even if raisers have
always in mind in future the desideratum of flaring falls, it is
not be expected, nor is it desirable, that they will refrain from
introducing a new variety which fails in this respect but has
other desirable characteristics. There is also another consideration

[7]

which will be a factor in perpetuating the existence of the straight-
hanging fall, and that is its value in mass planting, where the
colour effect is immensely increased by the open view of the
fall presented at right-angles to the eye. It is, I think, obvious
that the canon of perfection which demands flaring falls will
never succeed in altogether banishing the straight-hanging fall.

The next point demanding study is the shape and proportion
of the falls. The following shapes have been distinguished and
named: — obcordate, cuneiform, spatulate, oblong, obovate, ovate,
fiddle-shaped and circular. The most desirable forms are the
obcordate and the obovate ; the broad, more or less wedge-shaped
segments are symmetrical and display the colouring to the best ad¬
vantage. Examples of these good types are Peerless, Micheline Char-
raire, Mile. Schwartz, Vert Galant and Souv. de Mme. Gaudichau.

Then again the falls must not be pinched (have a waist) as
though malicious fingers had deliberately constricted them. Mag-
nifica, Mme. Chereau and Louis Bel are examples of Irises which
sin more or less in this respect. This fault is easily and quickly
appreciated even by the tyro, and I cannot imagine anyone fail¬
ing to acknowledge the inferiority of the pinched, strap-like fall
as compared with the broad, flat fall. A cognate fault is the
pointing-in of the tips of a straight-hanging fall towards the
stalk, already referred to.

It is not necessary to dilate upon the forms intermediate be¬
tween the good and the bad forms which have been referred to in
these notes. Insofar as they approach or depart from the ideal,
they will take their appropriate places in the estimation of the
Iris student and with the rapid increase in the number of hybrid-
isers at work on the Iris, and the greater daring displayed in
making crosses, it is to be expected that substantial modifications
of existing types may arise which, in their turn, will be weighed
in the balance and assigned their niches in the Iris world. If
raisers will always have in mind definite principles relating,
inter alia , to proportion and form and set themselves to work
to a high standard there will be fewer unworthy flowers intro¬
duced. It should always be borne in mind that, as Pasteur said,
“Chance favours only the mind which is informed. 79

Substance, Texture and Surface

It is very regrettable that writers on Irises and compilers of
of catalogues use the terms Substance and Texture indiscriminate-

[8]

ly. The words are not synonymous. Substance refers to the corpus
of the material of which a thing is composed. Texture is not con¬
cerned with the mass of the material but with the disposition
of its threads or fibres and the resultant grain and surface. It is
so obviously convenient and proper to maintain the distinction
between the two terms that I may be forgiven my earnestness in
appealing for a scrupulous care in choosing the right word.
Surely it is not difficult! DeMaupassant said “the literary pil¬
grim must seek the right words with fasting and prayer,” but
here the right words are ready and so clearly defined that they
should be used discriminate^ on their lawful occasions. To talk
of velvety substance or thick texture, as is frequently done, is
absurd, and these errors reach their climax in the statement by
one catalogue-maker that a certain variety “has no texture at all!”

Now, to give a thought to substance. We say that a flower has
substance when its petals are thick and stout, connoting long-
lasting flowers with erect standard segments, resistant to wet
and to a torrid sun. Some observers aver that the deeper the
colour the better the substance, but I am not yet convinced that
this can be accepted as a rule. Although, perhaps, a goodly
number of examples can be adduced in support of the theory
it cannot, at all events, apply when the flowers are white — think
of the splendid substance of the petals of La Neige! Nor does it
apply to the species juncea, with its deep yellow colour and its
flimsy petals. I am tempted to speculate from another point of
view and ask whether it would not be more accurate to say that,
excluding white forms, stout substance gives a better colour by
adding depth, although, of course, there are exquisitely lovely
flowers of quite diaphanous substance. It is not unusual to hear
the remark “What a fine, solid-looking colour!” Moreover, I can
imagine that, without good substance in the petal, a colour might
be lifeless. What dejected-looking flower Tenebrae would be if
its petals were flimsy instead of thick!

Some instances of stout substance, in addition to La Neige
and Tenebrae, are Ambassadeur, Evadne, Dominion, Dariel, Blen¬
heim, Theseus, Grace Sturtevant, Mystic and Cardinal. They re¬
mind me of Roses like Hugh Dickson, where the petal is so thick
and stout that it tears rather than submit to the fingers of the
rose-dressing showman.

The petals of some varieties have been described as leathery,

[9]

but it is doubtful whether this particular adjective can be cor¬
rectly applied to any Iris petal whatever, although I must ac¬
knowledge that the beardless I. Monnieri comes very near it.
Mr. Franklin B. Mead says that Caroline E. Stringer has “a
texture of kid,” so that apparently the notion of leatheriness (even
if a soft leatheriness) does jump to the mind of some close observers.

Defective substance may consist in material that is either
too thin or too loosely woven. Oriflamme and Edouard Michel are
examples of the former, and Halfdan, with its blotting-paper
petals, of the latter. There is, fortunately, a compensating fea¬
ture when bringing up for judgment those Irises which are
defective in substance, for there is a translucent loveliness about
some of them which evokes a gasp of admiration when the young
flower flaunts its beauty on a perfect, sunny day. These irises are
seen at their best when the setting sun, with its low angle of
light, reveals the uttermost depths of colour, intensifying espe¬
cially the red pigment tones. Despite this, we must admit that,
all things considered, it is better to have the petal of thick
substance which refracts light instead of absorbing it.

Turning to Texture, the most popular type is certainly the
velvety surface. The eye of the beholder responds instantly to
velvetiness with its sensuous implications of richness and luxury.
There were not many velvet-petalled Irises before Dominion came,
but now there is a considerable number, e.g., Souvenir de Mme.
Gaudichau, Mrs. Valerie West, Blenheim, Louis Bel, Grace Sturte-
vant, Mount Royal, Melchior.

A satiny surface also makes a strong appeal to the eye, al¬
though not so imperially assertive as the velvety surface, and it
can never be passed by without a tribute of admiration. It
has a quality of fastidiousness which the more comfortable vel¬
vety flower has not — the one is a French aristocrat of the ancien
regime , the other is a wealthy Dutch burgher. Conspicuous
among these satiny flowers are Harmony, Gold Imperial, Prin¬
cess Beatrice and Yeoman. There is also a surface, as in Kochii
and Mme. Henri Cayeux, which is hardly satiny as Harmony is
satiny, but has been aptly described as of watered silk. Familiarity
does not dull the appreciation of this quality; the gardener’s
eye inevitably dwells upon it in passing, however familiar it may be.

Perhaps the most glorious and entrancing surface quality is the
golden sheen of Queen Caterina and a few others. It floats be-

[10]

tween onr eyes and the foundation colour of the flower as a
celestial film on the bridal robe. Tintallion and Zwanenberg have
it in a greater or less degree, but Queen Caterina is, to me,
the supreme example of this crowning glory. This silvery sheen
of Isoline and Mother of Pearl and Wild Rose is charming, but
Queen Caterina is something to worship as Linnaeus worshipped
the golden gorse. One thinks of Flecker’s exquisite phrase, “gold
dusty with tumbling amidst the stars.”

It is interesting and provocative to read that, according to
an American writer, a new Iris, Hermitage (old rose blend), has
“the bloom of ripening grapes upon its falls,” but judgment on
this must be suspended until the flower is seen in this country.

Frilling, Ruffling and Waving

As with many other points of distinction it has to be ac¬
knowledged right away that it is only a matter of individual
taste whether the smooth, unruffled petal is preferred to the wavy
or frilled. In the pallidas, Princess Beatrice, Odoratissima, Monte
Brione, etc., some are heavily frilled, some are plain and smooth,
and each has its admirers. Personally, the smooth-petalled flower
has my vote and while reflecting on it I recall the smoothness
of Hoogiana, a very aristocrat among Irises, or, as Dykes put it,
an Iris of “a curiously well-bred and refined appearance.” With¬
out in any way intending to derogate from its beauty, I cannot
help recalling the “immaculately-dressed” and “well-groomed”
heroes of Ouida and other lady novelists. Examples of ruffled
flowers are Susan Bliss, Damozel, Dimity and Rene Denis. There
are a few varieties in which the ruffling seems to be an integral
and satisfactory feature of their attractiveness, as, for instance,
that lovely flower Sweet Lavender. Nor does the tendency to
ruffiling which is seen in Prince Charming and Lohengrin detract
from their beauty. And here I must take myself to task for a
possibly hypercritical attitude — ’there is a beauty of the smooth
petal and a beauty of the ruffled petal (so that the ruffling be
not excessive), and the two can co-exist.

A slight waving of undulation of the edge does not detract
from the beauty of the petal or from the appearance of breeding.
Micheline Charraire has this undulating edge but it is probably
unnoticed except by a few. The same leniency of criticism can¬
not, however, be expected as regards a fluted or ribbed petal,

such as is seen in Frieda Mohr. Most people will notice this at
once as an unpleasing characteristic, the ribbing giving the effect
of the flower having been unskilfully packed and crushed in the
post. Another variation is found in the fimbriated edge, e.g.,
Col. Candelot. Well, I am not so stricken with horror at the
sight of a fimbriated edge as are the Carnation purists, but the
form must, I think, be set down as inferior.

None of these variants upon the smooth-surfaced and smooth-
edged form makes any difference to the border and mass effect,
which, after all, interests the majority of gardeners more than
a question of the perfect form viewed under the microscope of
the Iris student, but this must not be taken as a condemnation
of the student, who may at one moment be frowning at an aber¬
ration on an imperfection and a second later gloating over the
intrinsic beauty of the flower. The student, no less than the
average gardener, doubtless feels, as Countess Senni puts it,
that “ after all the raison d’etre, and the primary duty of an
Iris is to furnish colour, and only secondarily to make a per¬
fectly-proportioned picture in doing so,” but the student’s is the
deeper enjoyment because of his appreciation of the finer points
which are unnoticed by the man in the street.

Veins and Reticulations

It must be premised that any criticisms or strictures under this
head do not apply to the beautiful, characteristic veining of
the oncocyclus, regelia and regelio-cyclus Irises, but there are
Bearded Irises where heavy and inharmonious veining or reticu¬
lation definitely spoils the flower, especially if the markings are
on a light, cold ground-colour. Some maintain that a reticulated
haft makes for distinction and gives added colour, and there
are some varieties of which this is true, but there are certain
flowers, e.g., Monsignor, Troost and Mme. Boullet, where the
markings, being very coarse, ruin the colour effect. In San Fran¬
cisco and Los Angeles the delicate marking’s harmonize admirably
and the faint veinings of Monnieri (a beardless Iris) do not in
any way detract from its great beauty and value. The white
and bronze reticulations on the haft of Queen Caterina are soft
and charming against the pale lavender of its colour. Distance
has an ameliorating influence on coarse markings because they
merge in the general colour effect — Miss Sturtevant remarks that
the haft reticulation of Susan Bliss is displeasing, but that from a

[12]

distance the effect is a true, soft pink — and the deeper purple
markings of Her Majesty are such that that variety is officially
classified as self. Incidentally, it must be noted that in some
cases, e.g., Mrs. Valerie West, the veining does not show up
conspicuously until the flower ages. The two schools of opinion
on this point are interestingly exemplified in the case of Glow¬
ing Embers, in regard to which Mr. Franklin B. Meade says:
“The reticulation of Glowing Embers greatly enhances the beauty
of the flower,” while another American critic emphatically de¬
clares that “on account of its reticulations this Iris should never
have been named and introduced.”

There is not much to be said about the dotted (sanded)
varieties, except that they are not generally popular. Perhaps
this is because the sanding appears to be somewhat of a triviality.
It is almost as though a schoolboy, having completed his chaste
and simple original design, proceeds in a dissatisfied spirit to
embellish it with such idea of ornamentation as occurs to him.
Naturally, there are some of these varieties which approach nearer
than others to one’s idea of beauty, and of these Mme. Chobaut,
Jean Chevreau and Nicolas Poussin may be instanced.

And so these very incomplete notes end for the present. I put
forward my opinions diffidently and I have endeavoured not
to be dogmatic or didactic but simply to put into words some
of the thoughts which have occurred to me in gardens and at
shows, feeling that the time may have come for a crystallization
of the floating ideas as to form, poise, branching, texture, etc.
Discussion is good, and my best excuse for the criticisms in which
I have indulged is probably that most people like to read other
people’s opinions on their favourite varieties. When they find
one of their pets lauded they feel a glow of satisfaction at the
justification of their preference. If one is adversely criticised,
or ignored, they are indignant and perhaps rush into print to
present the other side of the argument. In either case they have
been stirred up and the critic, though perhaps smitten by a
giant hand, may congratulate himself on having applied the
health-giving stimulus.

So, if your interest has been aroused, or, having been previously
aroused, has been deepened, plant more Irises and let them greet
you with the early sunrise, enthral you during the sun and
shower of the day and thrill you with their enhanced glory
when the westering sun shines through their rainbow petals.

[13]

IRISES IN IOWA
Mrs. C. G. Whiting

■ Starting fifteen years ago with a dozen good varieties of Iris,
we were contented for a few years with the interesting color com¬
binations they made with the other spring flowers in the border;
but seeing new kinds in the gardens of our friends, we added a
few each year, planting always for color harmony. Now with
nearly six hundred varieties and species, we might be called col¬
lectors; but we aren’t really, because we grow Iris for its garden
beauty, not for pride of possession. Gradually Iris has dominated
all the borders, taken complete possession of the vegetable garden,
and overrun all the available adjoining property. New varieties
are planted in trial beds and not used in the garden scheme till
the stock has increased enough to make a good showing of color,
and effective locations are found for them.

The stage is carefully set, and against a back drop of soft green
shrubbery, the chorus of tall fair beauties, emphasizes the indi¬
vidual parts played by the principal actors. Sometimes the
chorus, at least in general effect, steals the show. The fascinating
new blends are shown very effectively as a point of interest before
a large planting of seifs in light harmonizing shades. Talisman
is more glowing against a back-ground of soft blue, and Elsinore
seems to have borrowed its delicate lilac flush from a nearby
planting of Thais. Midgard is lovely planted by Gabriel or Mary
Barnett. Clear colors are the more clear for contrast, as a group
of Sensation and Pluie d’Or in front of Snow White shows, and
the purity of San Francisco is accentuated by grouping with Sur¬
prise and Mrs. Marion Cran.

Many of the shrubs flower early and echo the shades of the Iris,
or make a pleasing contrast. Blue, pink, and white lilacs, Kolkwit-
zia, and Viburnum Carlesi suggest beautiful combinations. Shades
of Blue Iris are enhanced by Rosa Hugonis, and even the difficult
variegatas are more pleasing when given a drop curtain of Phila-
delphus aurea. Before a mass of white spirea or Philadelphus
Virginal , tall dark blues like Blue Velvet or Black Wings make a
perfect setting for Purissima or Venus de Milo.

That we have found room for many of the fine new varieties,
does not mean that we think they displace the old favorites. The
tall slow types are not always the most comfortable in the garden,

[14]

and many a visitor turns his back on some proud prize winner to
look wistfully at a long stretch of Susan Bliss, Chartier, or Hus-
sard. They seem to fit their surroundings so perfectly, and never
look self conscious.

Given good drainage and plenty of sunshine, nearly all types
of bearded Iris seem to thrive in Iowa. Borers are unknown, and
root rot bothers only occasionally, where drainage is not right. We
use no fertilizer except where the soil has been constantly used
for years, and then only bone meal. Established plantings need
no protection in winter, but newly set roots should be covered with
wild hay or leaves to prevent heaving. Even California Iris are
hardy here if given a light covering of wild hay and perhaps the
added protection of a box covered with water-proof building
paper. This keeps out excess moisture and prevents the plants
from starting too early in the spring. Purissima, Santa Barbara
and San Francisco have been wintered this way here for several
years, and they behave very much as if they liked it, producing
perfect spikes. Mme. Durrand and Candlelight bloom freely and
increase well. Desert Dawn is a good companion for Rameses and
grows almost as sturdily in our garden. Blue predominates in
Desert Dawn as rose in Rameses, and each is a good foil for the
other. Endless color possibilities make Iris gardening a rare game.

I feel as Mrs. McKinney does, that Bearded Iris are not suit¬
able for planting near pools, even when a well drained location is
given. They just do not belong. The slender leaved sibiricas and
kaempferi are more in harmony. A large planting of Japs bloom
well at the lower end of our pool, where the overflow may be
diverted at blooming time. Starting with good named varieties
we have allowed seedlings to develop, but pull out those not clear
in color. Myosotis carpets the damp soil, and nearly covers the
wide stone path. Along the edge of the pool light blue and white
sibericas make a lovely picture, Blue Charm the finest one. On a
slope near by, where it can sprawl is Dorothea K. Williamson,
among pale yellow columbine. Along a shady, mossy watercourse,
Iris cristata thrives among maiden hair ferns; and yellow ladv-
slippers nod farther back in deeper shade.

Mrs. Wright says every garden should have a motto, and ours
is carved on the back of an old cypress lawn seat:

“Who loves a garden
Still his Eden keeps ”

[15]

H. M., A. M., D. M.

(The recommendation of the Committee on Awards that a variety he observed
for five years before the Award of the Dykes Medal, was approved by the

Directors December 9, 1933. — Ed.)

■ The letters in the caption are not abbreviated swear words,
although profanity has been known to result from their applica¬
tion. We are not concerned with their ethical significance. Neither
do we question the right of duly constituted authority to bestow
them on suitable subjects.

There have been times, however, when the Committee on Awards
have secerned to be in too great haste to exercise their prerogatives
and for this reason their decisions have sometimes been questioned
in spite of the fact that the recipients were probably worthy. I
refer particularly to the award of the Dykes’ Medal.

How well should a variety be known in order to be eligible to
the honor? Should we be governed by time regulations which
are applicable to a relatively small country like England but
which may not be applicable to this country? England can be in¬
scribed in a circle of about 150 miles radius and is somewhat
smaller than the state of Illinois in area.

It would seem reasonable to assume that the distribution of the
variety rather than the “elapsed time since introduction” should
be a governing condition of eligibility.

Few of our judges or dealers have either the time or money
(especially during the past two years) to travel several hundred
miles to score or see new varieties. It is somewhat of a gamble
to purchase new varieties even when they have received an H. M.
at a distant place. Unless the good new varieties are sent to dealers
and (or) selected gardeners on trial, the distribution may be slow.

Destructive criticism should be accompanied with constructive
suggestions; hence I suggest that until the same number of ac¬
credited judges, say three, have rated a variety in each horticul¬
tural district and their ratings have been filed with the appropriate
custodian, the award should not be made. Furthermore, the ratings
should not, in general, be made on the blooms of one year plants.

Another method would be to rate new varieties only in centrally
located test gardens in horticultural districts. A part of this
scheme has been tried with indifferent success and is probably not
feasible on account of the cost.

Digby Legard.

[16]

SCIENCE SERIES NO. 13
POLLEN TUBE BEHAVIOR IN IRIS
By Willis E. Chase

E It is a well-known fact that some varieties of Iris are polli¬
nated much more readily than others and that in some varieties,
even after artificial pollination, seed does not develop, due no
doubt to the lack of fertilization. Whether lack of fertilization
is due to inability of the pollen to germinate; to some obstruc¬
tion to pollen tube growth ; to too much competition among
pollen tubes or some other reason is not definitely known.

It was suggested to the writer that he make a study of the
pollen tube growth in Iris to determine, if possible, the percentage
of pollen tube germination, rapidity of pollen tube growth, course
of the pollen tubes through the style, a simple method of demon¬
strating pollen tubes in the style, presence of nuclei in pollen
tubes and any other information obtainable. This study was
suggested by Dr. A. E. Waller, Professor of Botany at The Ohio
State University, and it was the privilege of the writer to be
under his direction throughout the study.

White Irises which produced an abundance of pollen were
selected for experimentation. White was selected because of
the lack of pigment which otherwise might render the pollen
tubes obscure from vision under the microscope. This particular
plant was also used in the experiments because it was found
to be easily pollinated.

Several flowers were self-pollinated by removing from each an
anther heavily laden with pollen and rubbing the pollen upon
the stigmas of the flower from which the anther was taken. The
plants were pollinated at 10 A. M. and left in the garden under
natural conditions. At 8 P. M. of the same day, the complete
stigmas and styles from one flower were removed and the epi¬
dermis carefully peeled from the upper side of each style with
the aid of a sharp razor. Each was next mounted in water
on a microscope slide and examined with the medium power of
the microscope (16 mm. objective). Approximately 90 per cent of
the pollen grains present upon the stigmas had germinated and
grown down to varying distances into the styles while a few had

[17]

F 's i // o/f H n 5
gp&hural Size )

Figure lo

G e nr? in $fio r, & Growth
Roller? tubes f trough

/ Stu/e. . *

{Approx * /OOX)

Figure Z.

Sec//o)7 aC Style trorn
FznS nth fade «/i+h go/kn tubes. Figure Sc
(ApproX* ZOO Xj

reached the perianth tube (Figure 2). Growth of the pollen
tubes took place very rapidly after germination, as indicated by
the fact that a few of the tubes had reached the perianth tube
within 10 hours. The average distance between the stigma and
perianth tube was 30 mm. (Figure 1). The course of pollen
tube growth through the style to the perianth tube could be
easily traced since the tubes themselves were somewhat darker
than the surrounding tissue cells. After the pollen tubes had
reached the perianth tube, however, a different technique was
required in order to clearly distinguish the course of the pollen
tube through the perianth.

After sufficient time was allowed for the pollen tubes to grow
down through the perianth tube, a few complete flowers were
removed. The perianth tube and ovulary of one were cut into
thin longitudinal sections with a sharp razor blade and mounted
in glycerin upon a microscope slide. Examination with the micro¬
scope revealed nothing. This method proved a failure since this
process was repeated with additional flowers with no satisfac¬
tory results.

An eosin-glycerin preparation was used on longitudinal sec¬
tions with the purpose of staining the pollen tubes but instead
the surrounding tissues became stained, making it even more
difficult to distinguish pollen tubes if they were present.

Good results were finally obtained by first boiling the complete
pistil in water for 2 minutes to soften the tissues. It was then
transferred to a 75% formalin solution where it remained for 1
hour. As much as possible of the outer part of the perianth
tube was then removed and the whole placed in a strong solu¬
tion of anilin blue for one-half hour. The strength of the stain
determines the length of time that the object to be stained
should remain in the solution. The pistil was next removed,
dipped in 'water to remove excess stain and placed in 25% lactic
acid for one-half hour to clarify the tissues. It was then trans¬
ferred to a slide and flattened as thin as possible by pressure
applied to the top of another slide placed above. Upon examina¬
tion, the pollen tubes could be easily seen down as far as the
ovulary (Figure 3). At the ends of some of the tubes nuclei
could be seen. Basic fuchsin was also used as a stain in place of
anilin blue with fairly good results. This was as far as the

[19]

writer was able to trace the growth of pollen tubes by means
of these simple methods.

It was observed that the tubes followed the vascular system
in the style from the stigma to the ovulary. They were repeatedly
observed growing between the vascular strands (Figures 2 and
3). This might be due to a possibly greater supply of food ma¬
terial for pollen tube growth along the vascular system.

Another experiment was performed to determine more accu¬
rately the rate of pollen tube growth. Immediately after pollina¬
tion, several complete flowers were removed by cutting them
off just above the ovulary. The cuts were made with a sharp
razor blade under water. The cut ends were immediately placed
in a bottle filled with water. These cut ends were observed from
time to time with the microscope and, after approximately 20
hours, the end of pollen tubes could be seen projecting out
beyond the perianth.

It was estimated in this Iris that it takes approximately 20
hours for the pollen tube to reach the ovulary after pollination
when conditions are favorable.

SEED SOWING
Roy W. Gottschall

■ When To Plant. — For a number of years I have planted tall-
bearded iris seeds in the late summer and early autumn, but hav¬
ing various degrees of success, thought it would be a rather inter¬
esting experiment to use several ounces of “field run” seed in an
experiment : the objective being to find out just when the seed
should be planted.

Seeds were harvested from August 6tli to September 15th. The
first batch collected were from hand crosses and planted August
11th after thoroughly drying out. Some few of these seeds
sprouted in 72 days and were out of the ground on October 22nd.
A few of these seeds were held before planting as much as 17
days. The seedlings came through the ground in great numbers
from April 16th to the 22nd, taking practically 253 days to
sprout. The fall sprouting is not desirable in outdoor field plant¬
ing in central Ohio on account of the great number of freezings

[20]

and thawings throughout the winter and so the August 15tli
planting was just a little early.

From September 25th to February 12th, inclusive, plantings of
a known number of seeds that sank in water (therefore matured)
were made every 14 days, in parallel rows, with like soil condi¬
tions, etc.

There could be two ways to consider the results : percentage that
actually did sprout in the spring of those planted, or taking No.
1 batch as a basis for computing the percentage of sprouting of
the other batches. In other words, being from a collection of
seeds that were very well mixed, the per cent of fertility through¬
out was practically the same. Some were not fertile even though
they sank in wrater. The first batch started coming through the
ground on April 1st and by May 10th, 48 per cent of those
planted had sprouted. The rest held over until the next year or
were no good. If 48 per cent of the first planting in the test came
up, then it could be assumed that 48 per cent of all the later
plantings would have also come up, except that they were not
planted until later dates. The time the seeds were kept out of
the ground was the only variable.

From the table given it will readily be noticed how serious it
is not to plant tall bearded iris seeds within ten days after har¬
vesting. Only 2 out of every 100 seeds sprouted the first spring
when not planted until January 30th — 46 out of that hundred
had decided to lose their vitality or wait another year to sprout.

r — i

H—

o fcdO

O rH

• rH
-4-*

• rH
pH

C4— t .

c be

o o

O f-H

-H

£ £

1X1 o

o 2

rj ^

^ <u

<x>

r-H

Sept. 25

208

48%

100%

Oct. 9

194

36%

80%

Oct. 23

180

25%

52%

Nov. 6

166

14%

30%

Nov. 20

152

13%

29%

Dec. 4

138

102

11%

23%

Dec. 18

124

116

18%

Jan. 1

110

130

13%

Jan. 15

144

Jan. 30

158

Feb. 12

172

[21]

Iris Seed Sprout in Peat. — Having some seeds of tall bearded
irir on hand on January 1 it seemed worth while to see if they
would sprout in damp peat. A deep 6-inch earthenware pot was
soaked and filled to within two inches of the top with peat that
had been wet thoroughly in a bucket and then pressed out by
hand.

A number of seeds were placed on the peat and then covered
with an inch of fluffy peat from the same bucket, and then the
peat pressed down a bit. The pot was covered with window pane
glass and placed in the cellar where the temperature runs rather
steady at 54 degrees.

At the end of 81 days the first sprout appeared and they con¬
tinued to come up until the 106th day. That was the third week
in April, and after hardening off the pot in a cold frame the seed¬
lings were easily transferred to the field, the first week in May.

While in the basement the peat was watered at intervals with
an ordinary sprinkling can in order to keep the peat fairly damp,
although the glass covering protects it from any sudden evapora¬
tion and the extra watering may not be necessary.

Sprouting Dwarf Irises. — Dwarf iris seeds seem to keep their
sprouting vitality over a much longer period out of the ground
to sprout the first year. Planted as late as January 7 in the
midst of an Ohio winter, they were up and out of the ground
with their seedling fans by April 29. An early transplanting
will guarantee bloom the next year.

[22]

EDIBLE IRISES

■ The few records assembled in “ Sturtevant ’s Edible Plants”*
suggest that only among primitive peoples and in times of dire
distress do irises become an article of diet. L. ensata, japonica,
setosa, sibirica, and tectorum were all used and also cultivated as
a source of starch in Japan. One can imagine the slow grinding
of mortar and pestle, the probably frequent rinsing, the whole
laborious process of extracting one valuable element from the
mass of tissue.

“The hunters of Virginia use 7. cristata very frequently to al¬
leviate thirst. The root, when chewed, at first occasions a pleasant
sweet taste, which, in a few minutes, turns to a burning sensation
by far more pungent than capsicum.” So was it reported in
1814 by an P. Pursh.

Gerarde (1597) calls 7. sisyrinchium “Spanish Nut” and says
it is “eaten at the tables of rich and delicious persons in sallads or
otherwise.” This is our one suggestion of the use of iris in a
salad but in these days of a renewed interest in herbs one won¬
ders whether buds or flowers would not tempt. Perhaps a cushion
of cream cheese studded with small buds of Siberian irises, their
color just showing purple would attract or the fatter buds of the
bearded might be boiled for a minute or two and served on crisp
rounds of toast as a variant on asparagus. I suspect, however,
an underlying bitterness which would find itself more at home
on an hors d’ oeuvres.

7. pseudacorus with its angular seeds is said to form a good
substitute for coffee IF wellroasted. This was an 1862 report
and one wonders whether, as more recent, it might be more re¬
liable.

We must now leave iris proper and consider Moraea edulis, a
South African representative of the family. “The bulbous root
is eaten by the Hottentots. (I have always considered the euphony
of the name appropriate to Alice in Wonderland or The Wizard
of Oz.) When cooked it has the taste of potatoes. Tlmnberg

^Edited by U. P. Hedrick. The 27th Annual Report— Yol. 2— Part II, New
York Agricultural Experiment Station.

[23]

says, in Kaffraria, the roots were eaten roasted, boiled, or stewed
with milk and appeared to him to be both palatable and nourish-
mg.

I think to fulfill the expectations of my critical correspondent
I must include also records of Hemerocallis. Their flowers are
taken home and dried or pickled in salt by the Aino women
in Japan and then used in soup while those of the variety
minor in China are used as a relish with meat. The young leaves,
however, “appear to intoxicate or stimulate to some extent.”

Among others of the Iridaceae, Babiana may be boiled and
Gladiolus edulis tastes like a chestnut when roasted; sparaxis is
also edible and one is rather amazed that the bulbous irises are
not recorded as edible.

All in all our favorites may offer few opportunities for eating
but, on the other hand, there is no indication in root, leaf, or
flower of a real poison however displeasing they may prove to the
palate.

It would be most interesting if any member might possess a
personal record of such experiments. One wonders whether Queen
Caterina would prove more palatable than Pluie-d’Or, Tid-bit
than Sea Foam.

R. S. S.

VIRGINIA NOTES. 1933

Mrs. W. W. Gibbs

■ On April 22nd our first Bearded Irises bloomed. From then
until June 4th the garden was a riot of color from these magni¬
ficent flowers, to say nothing of the early dwarf varieties in the
rock garden and later joy from the Siberian, Dutch, English, and
Japanese.

Zwanenberg, one of the first, its unusual coloring attracting
immediate attention.

Primavera, though the stems are far too short for its lovely
large yellow blooms, it is early and I like it.

Los Angeles, a splendid, tall, stately white with blue edging,
similar to

San Francisco, a gigantic flower of white, edged with a ‘‘stitch¬
ing” of lavendar; well-branched.

William Mohr, a Pogocyclus hybrid with individualism in form,
texture and marking but not a free-bloomer with me.

King Midas. Such an unusual new color of golden buff and
garnet brown.

Dolly Madison with her perfect form and wonderfully blended
dress is high in the ranks of irisdom.

Purissima, the perfect white iris. It is exquisite, reminding
one of spun glass when it bursts forth in all its glory.

Pink Satin. Slow to multiply and slow to bloom but patience
is rewarded.

William R. Dykes, the largest yellow introduced to date, and
what a glorious sight it is.

Grace Sturtevant, a wonderful dark red-brown with thick vel¬
vet falls of violet-carmine.

Indian, a coppery blend that is so aptly named. Plant these
last three in a group, if you want a combination that is rare and
alluring. Place Indian a little in the foreground as it is not so
tall. Then, when they bloom, arrange them in a copper or brass
container and you will win a prize at any show.

Clara Noyes, the loveliest thing in my garden. It is gorgeous,
indescribable, with its gold, rose and bronze like a Talisman rose.
I am thrilled with its beauty though it stands only about 2 feet

[25]

near the front of my border. I found myself again and again
retracing my steps to this one clump, sometimes getting down on
my knees to closer admire its loveliness.

Mrs. Valerie West. Unquestionably an outstanding variety for
size and coloring but none too vigorous in my garden though I
have had it only one year.

Indian Chief is well-named — bold and swarthy like a painted
chieftain.

Dauntless, a wonderful new color nearest a true red self ; most
desirable.

Pluie d’Or; a disappointment considering the price I paid —
had much rather have W. R. Dykes.

These are just a few of my many favorites and among the
older varieties I would not be without Princess Beatrice, Lord
Lambourne, Hetty Matson, Afterglow, Aquamarine, Folkwang,
King Tut, Asia, San Gabriel, Thais, Chalice, Chestnut, Endymion,
Marquisette, Isoline, Candlelight, J. B. Dumas, Wedgewood, Cop¬
persmith, Tro-stringer, Cinnabar, and others that have proved
most dependable in my garden. After all, are we not laying too
much stress on breeding for size rather than for color, grace and
charm in the garden? Nene, for instance, is a mammoth flower
but I had a thousand times rather have Rosa Bonheur, Church-
mouse, Labor, Allies and Allure.

This fall, in October, several varieties bloomed again as if they
had not already done their duty in the spring. They were Chal¬
ice, Peggy Babbington (both yellows), Queen Chereau, Autumn
King, Jean Siret, and Souv. de Chavagnac.

[26]

IRIS MEMORIES

Edward Salbach

■ Never have I found a surer way of judging the merit of a
new iris than by waiting till long after the blooming season and
then looking backwards to see which have remained in my mem¬
ory. Those that “stick,” I can unquestionably consider as out¬
standing. The iris that I cannot definitely place or which seem only
vaguely familiar are not generally deserving among the very best.

In memory now, in the midst of winter, I can recall fifteen new
iris that etched a place for themselves in my memory. These fine
iris I place in my own personal honor roll of newest iris.

Dividing them into groups, I recollect them as follows:

VARIETIES ALREADY INTRODUCED:

California Gold — The new large flowered Mitchell golden yel¬
low. The best description I know is that of the iris enthusiast
who gazed, speechless at one of the blooms for a full minute,
then declared “It isn’t so. There is no such iris!”

Eleanor Blue — A very smoothly finished blue that is differ¬
ent in coloring from any of the other blues I have seen except¬
ing the sibirica, Perry’s Blue.

Legend — Probably the most outstanding of all the Wareham
iris. Its coloring of crimson claret is entirely distinct from
any other iris of similar size.

Marquita — A huge variegata from France, with cream stand¬
ards and falls lined light red, evidently derived from Helios
parentage.

Rubeo — Big and bold — in my opinion still the best large red
on the market. Always a favorite in the West, and now receiv¬
ing its due in Eastern gardens.

Sunol — One of the new Mitchell yellows which will probably
outscore all others, having perfect form. Given first award at
Spring Garden Show, Oakland, California, 1932, for rating 90
points or over. Color, golden bronze with faint lavender flush
in center of falls.

Tenaya — A larger and taller Modoc, with much better branch¬
ing habits. This is unquestionably the fine Essig variety that has
been introduced for many years. Most distinct and outstanding.

[27]

SEEDLINGS:

In Sydney B. Mitchell’s garden —

Anaconda — An iris in the copper shades that will set a
worthy mark for other introducers to shoot at. The best of
several fine Mitchell seedlings in this color group.

Golden Bear — Far and away the finest yellow iris I have ever
seen. Tall, with full large blooms, and perfect deep coloring.
The closer you examine the blooms, the more perfect they seem.
Actually glistens in the sun. If this variety does not end the
quest for a perfect yellow iris, I will have missed my guess.

Happy Days — A simply huge iris bred of Dykes. Probably
the largest individual blooms of any iris grown, and with a
splendid iridescent lemon yellow coloring. Not having seen any
of the other new Dykes yellows, I can offer no comparison, but
if the others are the same type of flower, they will have to be
good to better “ Happy Days.”

Portola — The kind of a variegata we have been looking for
for many a year. Twice the height and twice the size of Iris
King, with almost identical coloring, plus good branching habits.
Seedlings of my father’s —

Brunhilde — -A tall, handsome, deep violet. Distinct from
anything I have seen, and a splendid flower.

China Rose — A small iris of value because of its attractive
and delicate coloring. It is a deep pink, but I would risk no
detailed color description without having both a bloom and a
copy of Ridgway before me.

Dark Knight — A dark, dusky red that somehow has an in¬
describable bright glowing effect. Produces the same color
brightness among the dark reds as Modoc and Tenaya do among
the dark violets. Candelabra type branching, and very tall.

Seedling of Prof. E. 0. Essig: (Although I did not see all of

the Essig seedlings last year, one in particular took my eye) —
• Essig Seedling — This one, derived from Professor Essig ’s
Hollywood, has similar habit to King Midas, and is also com¬
parable to that variety in the brightness of its color. As I re¬
member the flower, it was a bright, brownish buff.

Time, of course, plays havoc with many a list of iris or any
other flowers, but I have a hunch that in two or three years I can
point to this, my Mid- Win ter Honor Roll, without having to
apologize for my choices.

[28]

VARIETAL NOTES

■ Allure. A pink blend of very clear color, with a deep yellow
edge to the falls below the yellow beard. Good branching with
the blooms well placed. It lias been very slow to increase and
shy blooming in my garden. Opaline is a better doer here.

California Blue. A stately Iris. The stalk is heavy but not
rigid and carries five nicely placed blooms, the terminal bud being
the first to open. The standards are blue with a purple flush,
the falls somewhat deeper. Should be divided often as the rhi¬
zomes are very large and soon mat, thus causing it to rot.

Cavatina. Of rapid increase, free flowering and fine form this
lavender gold blend is one of the nicest Irises in the garden.
The substance of the flowers is good and they are nicely placed
on stalks branching above the center. Perfectly hardy.

Challenger. Has set a new standard for intermediates. It is
a rich deep purple self with velvety falls which intensify the
depth of color. The standards are nicely rounded, the falls round¬
ed and flaring. The stalks are high branched and carry three
flowers. As outstanding in its class as were Los Angeles and San
Francisco when introduced in the plicata group, it would be a
worthy Dykes Medalist could the judges “see” anything other
than a tall bearded Iris for this award.

Cherry Rust. Used in small clumps in the front of borders
it would make the garden sing. Its jaunty flowers are rosy orange
and mahogany in mass effect, velvety and do not “spot” in rain.
It is perfectly hardy and of good increase.

Eppo. This is a smooth, cool pale blue white flower of fine
form and substance. The stalks are slender and high branched.
It is not a dirty grey blue but glistens in the sunlight and seems
to be a very valuable addition to the pale blue class. Has no
growing faults so far as I have observed it.

Golden West. One of the new intermediates, the 22 in. stalks
being high branched and carrying four blooms. It is a deep me¬
tallic yellow self, giving the same color effect as Crysoro but the
flowers of different form. Has shown no faults in growth here
during the years I have grown it under number and has given
good increase. The individual flowers remain in good condition
for several days.

[29]

Gleam. It lias no fault ! Comparable to Mary Barnett in color
as the latter shows when first opening. Gleam does not fade. The
standards are rounded notched at the center, while the falls flare.
The beard is deep yellow, giving a glow to the center of the
flowers, which are well poised on slender swaying stalks. Of
rapid increase, perfectly hardy and one of the freest bloomers I
know. Will be splendid for landscape work.

Grueze. A small ruffled flower of golden apricot color with a
gold beard. The standards are open and do not seem to be overly
strong, but it does give a lovely picture when planted near some
of the taller, small flowered seifs.

Mary Elizabeth. A brilliant Iris done in rosy lavender and
red tones. The stalks are well branched, the blooms nicely placed.
Is perfectly hardy here but of slow increase. Should not be used
in a mass or large clump for best effect, but rather in a small
clump with not more than half a dozen stalks.

Ultra. An intermediate and fall bloomer which should be di¬
vided often and have the soil renewed yearly to get the best fall
results. It is a bright blue bicolor of very heavy substance with
horizontal falls. The foliage is too tall for the flower stalks but
that is hardly noticeable so fine is the quality of the flowers.
It is a rapid increaser and perfectly hardy.

(Taken at random from letters received during the past year
from Mrs. Lothrop and Salbach, California (Region 14) ; Wash¬
ington (Nashville), Grant (Louisville) (Reg. 7) ; Loomis (Reg.
12) DuMont (Des Moines) Everett (Lincoln) (Reg. 9) ; Schreiner
(Reg. 8.); Duffy (Reg. 9) Pilkington (English).)

Acropolis. I wish you could have seen Acropolis as I saw it
in Mr. White’s garden. It must have been nearly six feet tall
with enormous rich blooms. — California.

Alta California. Worth many times more than votes re¬
ceived . — Minnesota.

Blue Hill. A compacter larger flower than Sensation with
broader falls and of the same inimitable coloring. Beautifully
branched, profuse and lasting bloom. — Nebraska.

Blue Velvet. Increases vigorously for me, blooms splendidly
and I love it but it is like most Dominions too bunchy. — Nebraska.

Was a fine thing as far as color and texture go but the spike
is far too crowded owing to the high branched stem. — England.

Was a great disappointment because the flower stalk grew only

[30]

about a foot and a half high while the plant made a tremendous
growth. — California.

Cantabile. An advance in amoenas. — England.

Carnelian. I fell in love with this. It is on the order of
Mauna Loa, the standards have a yellow undertone giving a
warmer effect. I thought the flower was very smooth and had
fine substance and finish. — Colorado.

Chalcedony. When it first bloomed I thought it was one I
could do without but before the season was over it had cap¬
tured my heart. — California.

Charmian. An intermediate which blooms like Bluet and Tin-
tallion but is of better coloring with an airy faery grace. —
Nebraska.

Chromylla. As I saw it this year it is superb. — Nebraska.

Cinnabar. I think it one of the loveliest of all irises. — Cali¬
fornia.

Desert Gold. It is a fine iris. Have watched it for three
or four years and every year it has been good. It will take a
mighty good yellow iris to eliminate Desert Gold when you con¬
sider all of its qualities. — Tennessee.

As I saw it not worth looking at, pale and insignificant. —
California.

Golden Flare. Was most striking as an apricot and peach
blend. — England.

Gold Lace. Is a smooth well branched yellow blend which I
rated 89%. I am not an enthusiast on blends in general so this
may be conservative. — Colorado.

G. P. Baker. A fine border plant; not a strong yellow, sul¬
phur standards and pale straw yellow falls with slight vena¬
tions. — English.

Gudrun. A fine heavy white, very large flower with ivory falls
and white standards ; lots of substance. Falls hanging, not a
‘‘perfect” form. — England.

Hypnos. Was a most attractive iris, l^t is as fine a blend as I
have flowered and attracted most every garden visitor. — Iowa.

Indian Chief. A good early variety in the red tones. — Cali¬
fornia.

Jean Cayeux. A clear golden brown beauty. — Illinois.

Lyra. Is somewhat novel being a very enlarged Quaker Lady
with style and stout texture to it. — England.

131]

Marquita. A most unusual thing and has a certain charm. I
should say is worth having if only as a “breeder.” — England.

Mount Royal.. Was magnificent this year, so many flowers,
so tall and well branched it was a striking thing in the garden.
Up to this year had thought it much overrated. — Iowa.

Mrs. J. L. Gibson. It is one of the best recent English intro¬
ductions, a much improved Gaudichau of heavy substance; beau¬
tifully poised and of A 1 form but not velvety in falls as in
Dominion. — England.

Robert. Is almost as deep in color as W. R. Dykes. One stalk
forty inches, sturdy and well branched; the standards are broad,
closed and the falls broad with no markings. — Kentucky.

Romance. One of the best ones raised in England of recent
years, charming. — England.

Rubro. Outstanding because it has much of the red tones of
Dauntless but the flower stalks were as tall as Purissima; individ¬
ual blooms large and of fine substance and splendid poise. It is
well branched. — California.

Serenade. Is the best pink I have seen so far. — Massachusetts.

Tioga. A velvety rich deep blue of lovely form and finish. —
California.

Zaharoon. One of the most beautiful things in Mrs. Pattison’s
garden this year; finest color it has ever shown and stood up
nobly. — Illinois.

DUTCH IRISES OF MERIT

■ Extracts from the report of the Wisley Trials as published in
the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society, Yol. LVIII,
Part 2.

Before the days of Quarantine 37 the cost of bulbous irises
was such in this country that northern gardens might well afford
to replant annually their favorites among the Spanish and
English irises. Even about New York one would find them fairly
permanent (at least as permanent as most tulips) in the right
soil and further to the south generation-old clumps were not
unknown. In those days the Dutch Irises were known but not
available in many varieties. They owe much to the Spanish

[32]

but tend to be larger, more vigorous, and earlier to bloom. This
has made them a special favorite for forcing but we know less
as to their permanence in the garden.

Eighty-one varieties were represented in the report and the
plantings of six bulbs each were examined on two successive years.
In the following list only varieties receiving an award are de¬
scribed (the others being merely named) and they are arranged
in accordance with the English Color Classification as no Ameri¬
can classification has been proposed.

Flowers White or nearly so

Polar Snow, A. M. June 6, 1932. 21 in. ; F. creamy white, large
orange blotch.

White Excelsior, A. M. June 5, 1932. 2 ft.; S. tinged cream;
F. creamy White, large oblong orange blotch.

Others: C. van de Windt, A. L. Koster, Mt. Erebus, Philip de
Koning.

8. White; F. Pale Yellow

van Everdingen, A. M. June 5, 1931. 2 ft.; F. primrose, large
orange blotch.

W. de Zwart, A. M. June 5, 1931. 30 in. ; S. creamy white ; F.
lemon, large orange blotch.

Others: Leonardo de Vinci, De Vos, A. v. d. Berg, Rachel
Ruysch, Huchtenburg, du Chatel, van der Venne, N. de Mooy,

JoSSELIN DE JONGH.

S. Bluish-white ; F. Pale Yellow

Apol, A. M. June 15, 1931. 30 in. ; S. white, base tinged laven¬
der-violet ; F. pale cream, orange blotch.

Others : Corelli, Albert Cuyp, Hobbema, Dr. Haringh, van

S COREL.

8. and F. Yellow

Heemskerk, A. M. June 5, 1931. 30 in.,; S. pale, sulphur, arch¬
ing; F. lemon.

Albert Neuhuys, A. M. June 15 1931, 28 in.; S. citron; F. deep
glowing orange.

Lucas van Leyden, H. C. June 17, 1932, 26 in.; S. bright yel¬
low; F. deep golden.

Yellow Queen, C. June 17, 1932. 34 in.; S. rich sulphur; F.
buttercup.

Others: van der Helst, Wouverman, Anthony Koster, Golden
Glory.

[33]

8. Lavender; F. Pale Yellow

Pieter de Hoog, H. C. 21 in. ; S. soft pearly lavender; F. cream.
Others : Franz Hals, David Teniers, Hugo de Groat, van
Ravensteyn, Floris Scholte, Seeghers, van Beyeren.

8. Lilac ; F. Creamy -white

Therese van Duyll-Schwartze, A. M. 28 in. ; S. arching, pale
silvery lilac; S. bluish-white; F. cream, tinged blue.

Anton Mauve.

Lavender Selfs

WlELAND, CASTELEYN.

Mauve Selfs

Adr. Backer, A. M. June 5, 1931. 28 in.; S. pale violet-mauve;

F. paler.

Others : P. Claez.

Pale Blue Shades

Wedgewood, A. M. June 5, 1931. 2 ft.; S. saxe-blue; F. pale sky
blue.

Hart Nibbrig, A. M. June 15, 1931. 26 in. ; S. lavender-violet ;

F. azure blue.

Others: H. G. Pot, Joseph Israels, N. Maes, David Bles, van
Loo, J. de Heem.

Blue Shades

Imperator, A. M. June 15, 1931. 26 in. ; S. arching, medium
violet-blue ; F. rich azure.

Theo Wyck, C. June 6, 1932. 2 ft.; S. violet-blue; F. azure blue.
Others: Lissie Ansigh, van der IIeyden, Celestial.

Dark Blue Shades

Jacob de Wit, A. M. 26 in. ; S. arched, violet; F. rich violet-blue.
Rembrandt, A. M. 28 in.; S. violet; F. violet-blue, large circular
blotch.

J. Victors, H. C. 20 in.; S. violet; F. pale azure-blue.

Others : Titan, Hendrik Pot, Praecox, S. de Rombout, First,
Garnier, A. Bloemaard, van Goyen, Poggenbeek, P. de Moulyn,
N. Kemp, Blue Celeste, Hoogstraten, A. Scheffer.

S. of Blue Shades; F. Smoky Lavender
Others : Goltzius, Bastert, Theophile de Bock, Dirk Verbeek,
Jacob Maris, Pieter Codde.

All of these Wedgewood and Imperator are probably the best
known but practically all the good varieties are obtainable in

[34]

this country and will prove particularly lovely rising behind
violas of selected tones or the yellows and whites and Phlox
divaricata or low Speedwells. With their slender foliage and
poised flowers they gain little in effect planted behind other
irises or even foot high masses of foliage.

The Editors would greatly appreciate members reporting as to
the permanence of their bulbous irises in various localities and
soils.

BACKGROUNDS
R. S. Sturtevant, M. L. A.

■ Few of us are so fortunate as to have many locations wherein
irises may be seen against the sky or against the blue of the
distance but probably everyone can find, through careful obser¬
vation, a spot or two where the rays of the early morning or of
the late afternoon sun will illuminate a special grouping. Such
a spot is worth finding even if we must set chairs out at the
edge of the lawn or through the garden and watch their shadows.

Locations where light irises may stand in silhouette against
relatively dark shadows are often almost as delightful in their
natural charm and these may always be developed on even the
smallest of lots. Shrub plantings, particularly if “ faced down”
(an all too horribly descriptive a phrase) offer no interesting
shadowed areas but if such a planting is more suggestive of a
natural hedgerow with an occasional small tree or high arching
shrub then in the foreground we can plant our irises to be
revealed against the resulting dark shadow. It is really only
when our shrub masses show such interesting variations of light
and shade or texture and color that they serve as worthy back¬
grounds. All too frequently does their mottling actually distract
from the picture.

Occasionally irises perched at the top of a wall may be seen
from below against the sky and even more frequently they may
line the terrace to be outlined against distant tree masses most
pleasantly and, less often perhaps, we may look down slightly
and see them silhouetted against the green of the lawn or a turf
bank.

“ Background” carries three intimations to me. In one case it
limits the view. I can see nothing beyond. In practise this often
means that at approximately the level of my eye nothing is to
be seen — unless I lift my gaze. In another case the pictorial com¬
position is such that I am not tempted to look further ; a most
happy solution but one more easily achieved for the eye of the
camera than for those of an observer. Incidentally a few
stalks of iris are more easily made a part of a picture than
great masses of them. Thirdly and more commonly, the back¬
ground is almost immediately behind our flowers and we must
consider it almost as carefully as though we were arranging
them for certain locations within doors.

In the earlier instances we have been considering pictorial
compositions and specifically the effect of light shining on or
through our flowers but now we must consider the actual texture
and color in close juxtaposition of flower versus background.
Evenness of texture and of color is to be desired whether we
use dipt plant materials or one of a variety of structural mate¬
rials. The alternating tones of a picket fence are often lovely
but are not good as a background; its charm is in its design
or in the casual way the leaves and flowers peer through. A
line of mixed shrubs again is not ideal though one shrub in full
bloom may create the picture with suitable irises in the fore¬
ground. In this case we have approached sufficiently near to have
our interest concentrated on a planned composition and we are
not far enough away to be distracted by what is happening to
left or right. With a broad foreground of grass a whole line of
irises against a line of Spirea Van Houttei or yellow roses and
a suggestion of trees beyond may be as fine a picture.

When one considers the use of a background it is evident that
it must be higher (or at least appear higher) than the irises.
Curiously enough irises peering over a wrall have none of the
charm that we associate with hollyhocks or larkspurs doing just
that. And, as seen from within, our interest is not on the irises
but on the beyond and, to an iris fan, irises should be the center
of interest.

It is a relatively simple matter to fit our color scheme of irises
to a background of tinted stucco, to painted wrood, to brick
or stone but as the wall surfaces become rougher we need both
more contrast of tone and bigger masses. One of my earlier dis-

[36 ]

appointments was a carefully planned scheme of whites to pur¬
ples against a six foot dry wall. There was variety of stone
color and the crevices became dark shadows and my scheme was
wrecked because, from only a slight distance away, the irises
toned in with the light and dark of my background. In replant¬
ing I used bigger masses of brighter color and they are lovely
rising from a six inch curb of stone similar to that of the wall
behind.

Even simpler is the placing of irises against a clipped hedge of
darkish green as relatively few varieties appear of the same
tone and even they may stand in front of taller, light flowers.

A good background, unfortunately is all too rare and when
found I usually prefer to make the most of it by keeping the
planting relatively narrow — for irises a four-foot bed being pref¬
erable to the eight-foot width that would display delphiniums
to advantage.

With wide masses of irises I frankly care little what may be
beyond but I do prefer that my view of unsightly structures
should be at least diverted. We may find such masses field cul¬
tivated or, in a garden, where the paths are none too wide but
if it be a garden we are expected to walk through its paths and
in the outer beds at least there should be background if only be¬
cause a garden that gives no sense of enclosure, of being shut
away from the world becomes merely a planting of flowers, —
undeserving of the name garden.

And for such enclosures I invariably prefer plantings of one
shrub as a backing to each bed. A well-trained row of raspberries
is far more effective than a row of one each ‘ ‘ treasures, ” Rosa
Hugonis, Lonicera Korolkowi, Philadelphus Virginal, Viburnum
Carlesi, Caragana arborescens, or Syringa Mme. Morel. Lovely as
they may be they should not be put in a row and used as a
background. Individually the gray of the lonicera, of eleagnus,
or juniper may be right with a touch of yellow or darkest irises.
The very light green of caragana may be equally right for rose-
toned blooms and the purple of Prunus Pissardi again good with
either rose or bronze and yellows. But the edge of grass in lawn
or wide curving path is a better place for such niceties of compo¬
sition. It is only for short periods of time that we can afford to
have the walls attract our attention.

Where it is not practical to change an enclosure of all-too-well

[37]

mixed shrubbery seek to develop interesting shadowed areas. Let
forsythias and roses sweep to the ground despite the space they
usurp. Give the lilacs and mock-oranges “legs” so that your
flowers may have a dark shadow behind and don’t do first one
and then another in regular succession but think of the ap¬
proach, the spots from which you will best appreciate the re¬
sult.

In foliage backgrounds we must consider two points — density
and habit of growth. In the clipped hedge we prefer in addition
small leaves that do not show the shears conspicuously when cut.
Even a deciduous shrub, if dense, makes an adequate screen in
winter. And an erect, many branches from the base, habit permits
the light to reach the base of our hedges, the most difficult spot
for density.

With these desiderata in mind box and yew would be a first
choice among evergreens, Japanese holly and azalea rather un¬
usual second choices where hardy. Pyracantha would prove a
possibility and, with support, the evergreen bittersweet. The
larger leaves of holly, of rhododendron, laurel, or, in the south,
of privet, Osmanthus, aucuba, and viburnum seem less adapted
to clipping though the habit be both erect and dense.

The difficulty with trees as relatively low hedges is the space
they take and the fact that, unless freestanding and away from
other growth, they tend to loose there lower branches, a most un¬
desirable development for a garden enclosure.

Of deciduous material, privet of some sort seems the most com¬
mon and the best except in very poor or shady sites. Many other
shrubs lend themselves to pruning and among trees hawthorn
and hornbeam are particularly responsive. There is no lack of
material for background and the absence of some sort of enclo¬
sure is the chief defect in many a colorful garden. And, if you
must be practical and grow your irises in lines, the protection
from wind afforded by even four foot enclosures is often worth
the space they take. For the untrimmed hedge remember that
an arching habit of growth takes added space and also forms
a less pleasant background than one thart approaches the vertical.
Privet, lilacs, Gray Dogwood, are much to be preferred to for-
sythia, bush honeysuckle, mock orange, or Rosa Ilugonis.

At the big flower shows it is interesting to note background
materials. Young larch gives a tender green; young arborvitaes,

[38]

hemlocks, or yews maintain their place for the short display—
the last two rich and dark ; stone and wTood, brick or plaster, many
painted surfaces may all be found. At Boston this year The
Chestnut Hill Garden Club put ub a beautifully worked out
display in the modern manner. The plan suggested a stage set¬
ting and both wings and backdrop were boards painted a royal
purple that was almost black in some lights (or rather shadows).
With white covered paths and white and lavender and purple re¬
peated in chair coverings, in stocks, and heliotropes the color
looked schemed. In an all iris (and hence short season) garden
the use of painted back-drops might be most effectively used and
we could well afford to simulate the striking black velvet contrast
of the show table. Why not temporary four-foot painted panels
to protect our favorites from harsh winds, even if only with
angular screens about the clump, how much we might enhance the
effect.

[ 39 J

SPECIES NOTES

(Photographs by Lady Collet)

Iris Korolkowi Regel.

■ This, the most well-known species of the Regelia section, re¬
quires a “warm well-drainecl position and a period of rest in
summer”' and in following this advice we planted ours in the
rock-garden on a sunny, gravelly slope, the only soil preparation
a good mixing in of leaf-mold. This was about 1914 when it was
still possible to import roots of both regelias and oncocyclus from
Holland most inexpensively. Of the many species tried korolkowi
(and one or two of its many color forms) was the only one of
these two groups that proved at all permanent and reliable in
bloom for even a few years. In our attempt to stimulate Turkestan
conditions we erred in providing a too clear gravel as the plants
prefer a strong loam.

The red-skinned rhizomes carry but few fibrous remains of old
growth and in their smoothness suggest some of the “sleek look”
that I always associate with this species. The leaves are narrow,
rather palish, and, in some plants, strongly tinged with purple
at the base. As pictured in The Genus Iris the flower is a bit
smaller than in our illustration, the color a pale olive-green
veined a reddish brown, the signal patch a darker brown on a
creamy-white ground, but I am more familiar with a form (pos¬
sibly var. Leichtliniana) with a much purer cream-white ground,
more purple veins, and an almost black signal patch.

This species seeds freely (relatively speaking) and when crossed
with Oncocyclus has given rise to many lovely varieties while
Pogo-regelia crosses are also well-known though often lacking in
both color and form. I know of no named varieties of this last sort
though, about 1916 we received a large consignment from Mr.
Williamson which, with few exceptions proved to be oddly colored
flowers, olive or greeish yellow often flecked or streaked with
dull purple, and all with incurving falls which completely de¬
stroyed the odd fascination of the Korolkowi parent.

Iris chrysographes Dykes.

Our reaction to this Apogon, first collected by E. H. Wilson
in 1911 in Western Szechuan has been most dependent upon the

[40]

I ady Collet

EEGELIO-CYCLUS HYBEIDS THAT SHOW IN FOEM AND PATTEEN
THE INFLUENCE OF IRIS IvOEOLKOWI

[41]

Lady Collet

HYBRIDS OF IRIS KOROLKOWI AND POGONIRIS

[42]

quality of selected plants. Like the Siberian Irises it is easily
grown from seed and surprisingly variable in the richness of
its purple and the contrast of the golden veining. In the better
forms this rich coloring is memorable and the vivid contrasts
well-presented by the drooping falls. As a clump the habit of
leaf and stalk is less erect than in most of the Sibiricas and the
green noticeably brighter and in Massachusetts the plant re¬
quires much more moisture, feeding, and cultivation to approach
the others in garden effect. I have seen quite spidery forms,
others with the gold reticulations hardly apparent and some
entirely without the rich velvet that can be so lovely.

A considerable number of seedlings that have been raised in
Maryland in small lots from different sources have shown the same
variation in coloring with enough to make one wonder if this iris
produces the same chance matings that occur with some of the
other Chinese Apogons, if they are all grown in proximity. When
one recalls that Mr. Perry has crossed this species not only with
Bulleyana but others this seems likely.

In planting chrysographes its deep coloring can be enhanced by
using nearby the pale yellow /. Wilsoni and masses of the deeper
yellow but lower growing I. Forrestii. The latter in Maryland is
much more free-blooming than Wilsoni and its deeper color makes
the greater contrast.

This year by accident, a single clump of the wrild Iris Kaempferi
bloomed in the line with chrysographes and Forrestii and while
distinctly later in flowering overlapped the season enough to add
its deep red purple flowers to the procession with the result that
the purple of chrysographes appeared more of a blue purple than
it really is. It is unfortunate that in the pursuit of the horticul¬
tural variations of Kaempferi we have not had the wild forms as
well, for their long and slender buds opening into the drooping
long petalled flowers adds another form of iris flower to the scene.
Iris setosa in one of the oriental forms, does not add as much as
one might wish for no flower here has approached the bloom figured
in Dykes, the Genus Iris. Rather they have appeared in effect
more like a well-flowered clump of our own virginiana until one
looks closely and missed the standards or until the pods begin to
form and show their curiously puffy and inflated cells.

[431

Lacly Collet

IRIS CHRYSOGRAPHES

[44]

Lady Collet

IRIS MISSOURIENSIS
It 'is missouriensis Nuttall.

As a member of the Longipetala Group of Beardless Irises this
species has a wide distribution between the Rocky Mountains, the
Cascade and Sierra Nevada and verges almost insensibly into
1. montana to the eastward. This last has pointed standards and
usually only two-flowered. Both like a heavy loam arid both
dislike transplanting so that, if the soil be too light, a liberal
top-dressing is to be recommended. The stiff foliage vanishes in
late autumn and it carries its rather spidery blooms well above
the foliage thus differing from I. longipetala to which it is closely
allied. The color is white so diffusely veined with violet (except
for the ridge flanked with yellow) as to appear a pale lavender.
As with the Californian species we have had little success with

[45]

Lady Collet

IRIS FOLIOSA

140}

Lady Collet

IRIS, DOROTHEA K. WILLIAMSON

[47]

this species, quite possibly because our soil is too gravelly and
well-drained. Its hardiness is not to be questioned.

Iris foliosa Bush.

The botanists seem to be in complete confusion as to the hexa-
gona-foliosa distinctions and, as mere gardeners we may, perhaps,
never be quite sure of what species we possess. Their likeness in
blue-purple tone and shape is certainly more apparent than their
differences, the dwarfness of 7. foliosa and the more glaucous
tint of the leaves. I also suspect that, in the north, I. hexagona
may frequently be less happy and develop a low habit and ab¬
normal, short, weaving flower stalks. At any rate both seem to
be reasonably hardy in Massachusetts and fairly reliable as to
bloom in a loam where the roots may reach moisture. In them¬
selves their color is the only possible charm but as parents they
have given us the rich red-purple of Dorothea K. Williamson
which, though a hybrid, seeds quite freely and leads on to big
blooms of delightful pink to purple tones. That the flexuous stem
often is apparent (and particularly where the soil is not rich and
wet) becomes a minor misfortune.

THE FAMILY TREE

Whites. Prof. Mitchell writes in The Iris Year Booh, 1933.

‘‘It is rather odd that only in recent years have we had good
white Bearded Irises, for apparently albinism is found through
the family. The very first white I ever grew, Innocenza, was ap¬
parently an Italian albino of 7. variegata. Yet I might almost
say that all the fine whites go back to Sir Michael Foster’s seed¬
lings, Kashmir White and Miss Willmott, both probably cypriana
albinos.

“Thus Purissima is Conquistador X Argentina, the latter a
white from Caterina and a Kashmir White seedling; Shasta is
Parisiana by the same pollen parent ; Easter Morn is California
Blue (a Conquistador seedling) with pollen of a white sister
of Purissima; Santa Fe is Conquistador X Miss Willmott, and
Natividad, my last white, with a golden heart, is a seedling
of Marian Mohr, itself derived from Miss Willmott by pollen of
a yellow seedling.

[48]

“Dr. Ayres’ Venus de Milo is from Kashmir White, and so,
I believe, is Wambliska (from Jacob Sass) and Sophronia (Mor).
Another line of recent whites, Donahue’s Polar King, and prob¬
ably Mrs. Dykes’ whites, are from Moonlight, whose parentage I
do not know.

“In general the complaint made of the best whites is their
dislike of wet winters, but inasmuch as whites crossed with col¬
oured flowers give a percentage of whites, why have not breeders
or amateurs, with whom Purissima, let us say, is difficult, cross
it with pollen of moisture-resistant varieties, selecting from a
sufficient number of seedlings what is best for their own con¬
ditions? May I remark here that there is some absurd idea among
many that plants bred in a mild climate are necessarily tender,
or that a certain parentage will settle the question one way or
the other. Resistance to a given set of conditions is, of course,
largely a matter of parentage, but sister seedlings differ in this
as they do in colour or form. Mr. Mohr’s Esplendiclo, though it
contains more mesopotamica than Purissima or San Francisco,
is perfectly hardy and easy at Wisley, and Los Angeles, a sister
of San Francisco, is noticeably more easily grown and more flor-
iferous than the latter in England.”

TO READ OR NOT TO READ

■ NEW GARDENS FOR OLD, by Stuart Ortloff and Henry B.
Raymore. Doubleday Doran. $2.00. The art of designing gar¬
dens and estates is not easily put into words and the immediate
need of books adapted to the use of the average small home owner
is most apparent. Despite the selected subject we find two chap¬
ters of remodeling, four on the various phases of design, the
plan the planting, application of principles, and the special
problem of the flower border and, finally two chapters on main¬
tenance of lawn and estate. Statistically there are eight pages
on remodeling, forty odd on maintenance and the balance (120)
on design, well illustrated and with typical plans with keys sug¬
gesting varied planting possibilities.

Though I question the title, the book is not only readable but
practically all general principles are immediately brought out
by an easily recognizable example. The organization of the plan

[49]

advised is excellent, the knowledge shown of plant materials and
especially of the use of perennials for effect most helpful and
the book is excellently indexed. That I question his selection of
an average sized lot as being more small town than suburban,
the consistency of certain references to this small-growing plant
which is later listed as relatively quick and large growing or,
again, fulmination against spiky foundation plantings and loud
variegations on the one hand and a recommended plan with a
mixture of arborvitaes (dwarf to be sure) yews, and pine and
juniper on the other. I confess my own preference for not over
four different plants with or without ground-cover in even a rela¬
tively large planting against the house, militates against any
endurance of ten different things in all textures and tones of
green. A similar complaint might be made for the one each
edging of the boundary planting and the emphasis on boundary
planting as such even though, elsewhere, he brings out most
delightfully that we should study our garden plans from the in¬
side (where we are) first.

Two unusual and most useful inclusions are “zones’’ for plant
hardiness based on the average number of frostless days in a
locality, and the listing of all shrubs used with a “buying
height” and a “ten-year growth height.” Often optimum grow¬
ing conditions are assumed but it is a fine idea. In fact, no
one, with a small place or even just a garden can fail to learn
much from this book and to improve their design and plantings.
That the results will not compare often with professionally de¬
signed gardens would not be surprising but at least the intelli¬
gent reader can go ahead and plan and, if worst comes to worst
and the problem prove unsolvable he or she is ready to gain much
from a professional consultation at a small fee. Few amateurs
realize that the landscape architect is available for consultation,
and that after that plans and actual supervision may, or may not,
be arranged for as the client prefers.

[50]

"ASK ME ANOTHER”

■ Iris Rot. This destructive condition was more prevalent in
1933 than in many years. Many letters were written to growers
to find just what factors were causative of the disease and what
means were taken by them to combat it.

Growers reported widespread and costly damage to their
plantings. Some of the older catalogs, I have in mind one of
the late Mr. Williamson’s, and some articles in various Bulletins,
supply valuable data on the subject.

In order to prevent rot certain fundamentals must be ob¬
served. I have found by bitter experience that one must avoid
the late planting of extremely large and fleshy rhizomes. When
you buy from a region which grows this type, ask that the iris
be shipped, if possible, at the end of the blooming season, or if
your purchase is belated ask that the rhizomes be thoroughly
sun dried before shipment. It would be well to give them
further sun ripening before planting.

If you live in a region of low temperatures, which is subject to
alternating freezes and thaws, it is better to cover the beds after
the ground is frozen. If you do not do so new plantings and
tender varieties will be liable to bacterial and other allied in¬
fections.

Most of us do not live in a salt hay district. There is too
much weed seed in straw and hay. An excellent substitute is found
in wood-wool, or excelsior. It does not pack as does straw or
become mouldy in early Spring — it also provides adequate
ventilation.

Heavily limed plantings are more prone to rot than those in
soils of acid or sub-acid reaction.

In most sections raised beds with adequate subsoil drain¬
age and rapid run-off are essential in the cultivation of
bearded iris. Air drainage is a prime necessity. Crowding in
the clump or in the border only invites disaster.

You must realize above all that sunlight in generous amount
is as vital in the prevention of rot as it is for the carrying
on of the life processes of the plant.

Air drainage and sunlight also prevent injury to the tender
spring foliage from other sources than those of frost and thaw.

[51]

Regions in which the borer is present have more rot than
those which are not infected. So if you wish to prevent rot
get rid of the borer. This can be done by frequent transplant¬
ing, and by the use of Dutox applied several times before bloom¬
ing time. It is hardly necessary to emphasize the need of re¬
moving all trash and litter from your beds, together with the
leaves of the plant as they ripen during the summer.

The use of cover plants between your iris is only tempting
fate. Keep your beds clean, and well cultivated.

If the above simple rules are followed, you may use well rotted
manure between your plants without fear of infection, otherwise
look out!

A splendid demonstration of how much abuse an iris can stand
and how efficient the treatment of rot can be, comes from my
own garden. Three years ago the beds were made over in part.

The ground from beneath a pile of well rotted manure was
used as a six inch top-dressing.

We had a heavy rain, followed by excessive heat. In about
ten days the iris to the number of a couple of hundred of the
best looked badly. Investigation showed the rhizomes in very
sad condition. Practically every fungus and bacterial infection
possible was present. It was too late that night to do anything
but pull them from the ground and let them lie. Next morning
they were wiped free from slime and rot, dusted with copper
carbonate, and then laid in the sun for two days. They wrere re¬
planted in the beds, after spading in the top layer thoroughly,
plenty of copper carbonate was used as they were planted,
the ground liberally dusted, and only one rhizome was lost !

It is self evident that a healthy plant under proper cultural
conditions is not as prone to infection as the ones which have
suffered from either thermal or mechanical injury, and that
excess moisture and heat are potent factors in the production
of rot.

The infection which is either bacterial or fungus, or both, in¬
vades plant tissues whose resistance lias been lowered. Once in¬
fection has taken place it rapidly spreads through sound tissues
and may destroy the entire rhizome, or at times the entire clump
before its presence is suspected.

One must be vigilant in Spring to recognize the injured plants.
When once found the treatment is a simple one.

[52]

To excessive moisture we must add a second factor of high
temperature before the yeasts, molds, slimes, and bacteria can
become a danger.

There are other periods of the year besides Spring in which
rot runs rampant, those of summer when excessive humidity is
accompanied by high temperatures. A warm rain of three or
four days’ duration in midsummer is sure to be followed by rot.
When the housewife finds the bread in the steaming breadbox
all soured and mouldy, then hie yourself to the garden and inspect
each individual plant — take measures immediately to stop the
infection at its beginning.

Each plant which has borne a bloom stalk is a prospective
patient. The outer leaves which may appear unhealthy, yellow¬
ish, should be removed as well as all the ripened ones. These
outer leaves can do no harm if the weather is dry, but are the
source of serious trouble if they begin to decay. The infection
then rapidly spreads to the rhizomes.

Not always is rot confined to the garden. Some times a part of
a shipment of roots will be destroyed or greatly injured. This
can be prevented by proper sun-curing before shipment, and
by proper packing between layers of woodwool in a ventilated car¬
ton. This proper packing is carried out by almost all growers at
the present time. All roots should be dipped in copper carbonate
dust at the time of packing.

Mr. M. E. Douglas tells of a kind of dry rot, black in color, in¬
filtrating the rhizome, which proved destructive with him. I
have met with it a few times in iris and in other plants with
fleshy roots. It is a black mold which grows in from a cut or
injured surface under conditions of high humidity and high tem¬
perature during shipment. If the rhizome is not already destroyed
cut off the blackened area, sun-dry, and use one of the prepara¬
tions which have been found to be successful.

I shall purposely omit any specific consideration of the causes
of rot, except to say that in certain types of foul rot certain bac¬
teria are responsible ; yeasts, molds, and slimes also play their
part. This summer the so-called mustard-seed rot was prevalent,
particularly interesting and fascinating because of its orange yel¬
low spore cases sprinkling the ground out from around the rhi¬
zome, while the white mycelial threads form a cob-webby network
on the ground and the rhizome. Pretty, but dangerous.

[53]

In the treatment of rot, it has been often recommended that the
rhizome be lifted, the rot cut out, the root soaked in a chemical
antiseptic such as bichloride of mercury, semesan, or some other
organic mercurial compound. It is also recommended that the
rhizome lie a day or two in the sun (sound advice), and that the
soil be sterilized with the same solution used to soak the root. Some
writers state that the hands, the knife or the spoon, must be ster¬
ilized after treating each affected rhizome. Imagine the task con¬
fronting one in a badly infected planting of thousands of iris !

I have not found such procedures necessary, nor have I found
the mercurials of any great value. They are, besides, dangerous
to use without great care. I presume that they are of value
in some regions. Formerly I did lift the rhizomes, remove the
rot, plant the rhizome exposed to the sun, the only instance when
it should ‘ ‘ sit like a duck on the water ’ ’ ! After replanting, the
rhizome was thoroughly soaked as was the ground about it, with
a strong solution of potassium permanganate.

For three years I have not found it necessary to go to all this
trouble. If rot is present, the rhizome is bared, the affected leaves
are removed, the rot wiped away with the finger ! Then a liberal
amount of a copper carbonate compound such as Cupro Japonite,
Copper Carb, is dusted freely into the cavity, and the ground
sprinkled liberally with the same. If the foliage is too heavy
some can be cut away to allow the sun and the wind ready access
to the rhizome.

At times when it was impossible to give individual attention to
the infected plants, I have not taken as much trouble as indicated
above. A handful of copper carbonate dust was thrown upon the
infected rhizome and the rot ceased.

Copper carbonate has the advantage of being cheap, is not
poisonous, has no caustic effect upon the plant, does not stain the
fingers, does not require solution, and what is most important
does the work.

In the final analysis it is certain that it is better to prevent rot
than to cure it. Good gardening for the iris demands ample sun,
soil drainage, air drainage through open planting so the winds
may blow moisture away, full cultivation, and painstaking tidi¬
ness in the beds. If these principals are adhered to, the most
of your troubles will be over before they begin, and iris rot will
become merely a nuisance and not a menace. — Dr. H. II. Everett.

[54]

TID-BITS 34TH

■ Winter Injury. A. W. Mackenzie, Indiana.

From personal observations made over a period of years, I have
arrived at a conclusion, that as a rule any Iris which is a deriva¬
tive of Amas, trojana, cypriana, mesopotamica or Bicardi is sub¬
ject to winter injury, here in central Indiana, if it has tall winter
foliage.

Did some one say that Dalila was a Bicardi derivative? If it
is, it is perfectly hardy any place because it gets its foliage habit
from its variegata parent.

There are probably exceptions to the rule, both ways, as for in¬
stance, Purissima does not have very tall foliage but is very ten¬
der while Brenthis does, but is hardy. Check for yourself the
known tender ones in the first part of Countess Senni’s list. I
know ten.

In a check of over a hundred of the older Iris, Ballerine had
the tallest winter foliage and was the tenderest except probably
Magnifica. Dalila had the shortest.

I am also convinced that a good deal of the winter injury to
recently transplanted Iris comes from the fact that most of them
go into the winter with new foliage that is taller than is normal
for the variety and there is no old foliage for protection.

Most of our injury comes not from late freezes but from alter¬
nate thaws and freezes and the temperature changes are so great
that mulch just protects from the direct rays of the sun.

Letters from California written in January mention a number
of varieties in full bloom and interesting seedlings, not only of
pogocyclus blood but also from Lady Paramount, the little-known
but highly rated light yellow of 1932.

Commercial Practice! “One thing I should like to see done at
an Annual Meeting would be to have a demonstration of cutting
up a clump of irises and show to the Growers and Buyers present
just what you ought to get when you buy One iris rhizome. Not
only are the amateurs sick and disappointed over the small
butchered things they get for much money but I have heard sev¬
eral of the growers literally “pan” other growers for the deals
they get from still others. One friend is “off irises for life.”
She showed me a two-year-old — that has not grown enough to

[55]

bloom yet. It was simply too small in the beginning. This same
party paid $20.00 for George Yeld several years ago and you know
what it is now. So with these two — and about ten other similar —
experiences. Her words are not surprising.

“And some action should be taken about the amateurs who cut
prices in a small leaflet and when you send the money by return
mail inform you that they are sold out. In one instance with me
they proceeded to knock the iris and advised me not to buy as
they were discontinuing it. I couldn’t help but wonder whether
they had ever had it for it was a magnificent thing at Freeport.

“What constitutes an Amateur and a Professional in the A. I.
S.? What enables you to get wholesale prices? If I sell a few
undesirable varieties from my garden am I entitled to wholesale
prices if I get out a mimeographed letter offering varieties I do
not intend to sell?

“Does membership in this Society entitle a member to whole¬
sale rates ? This is a question often asked and I have always said,
‘No, unless you buy and sell irises as a business’.”

The above extracts are evidence of current practises, practises
affecting high priced varieties in particular. Unfortunately the
discrediting of an individual discredits the product in general
and although the growers are now considering a Code of Fair
Practise under the NRA the buyer is the one who is most likely
to know of evasions.

Iris Albispiritus Small. (See frontispiece.)

As the color plate for this issue was not ready in time for the
text that was given in the A. I. S. Bulletin for April, 1933, the
text written by Mrs. Peckham is repeated here.

The Ghost Iris is a native of Florida where it has a very re¬
stricted range and occurs only in small colonies, in a usually dense
turf of grass, sedge and lowland flowers. It was found early in
1927 near the Caloosahatcliee River some twelve miles above Fort
Meyers. Up to this time reports of white irises discovered in this
region had been disregarded as it was thought that they were only
albino forms of I. savannarum which is common in the disetrict.
Several colonies, however, of I. Albispiritus were found growing
on both sides of the river by Walter M. Buswell during the spring
of 1927 and plants were sent to the New York Botanical Garden for
trial. They bloomed that autumn and proved to be quite different
from I. savannarum, in the long falls with slightly wavy edges, the

[56]

finely toothed standards and style branches, in fact in the whole
character of the flower.

In a way this iris resembles the Louisiana species and it is cu¬
rious that crosses made with it produce red and pink forms not un¬
like those obtained from crosses made with albino 7. gig antic aer idea
and 7. fulva. This gives much food for thought.

The name Ghost Iris was selected by Dr. Small because in its
native habitat one does not notice the foliage or stems from a dis¬
tance and the white flowers appear to float in the air like some
Will-o'-the-wisp or St. John’s Fire along the marshy river’s brink.
It is a pretty thing for the garden though in the North it does not
reach the four-foot growth that it does in Florida. The bright
yellow of the crests sets off the flower and if it is possible to get a
good patch in bloom up here, it could really be termed a flaunting
style of iris. Members living in the southern Coastal Plain may
expect a real success with 7. Albispiritus.

Ethel Anson S. Pechiiam.

Technical description may be found in Small’s Manual of the
Southeastern Flora, page 351.

Notes from a New England Garden.

Your editor has asked for experiences with bulbous irises. 7.
reticulata comes through the winters here (Hartford, Connecticut)
100 per cent, if given a good peat moss mulch. Increase, after two
years, is very satisfactory. A very happy grouping may be made,
with the two crocus species, C. susianus or C. Korolkowi, and with
Anemone pulsatilla. 7. bucharica was tucked into a warm corner
of the rock garden, with a wishful, but not very hopeful prayer ;
was given a 4-inch peat mulch, and has more than doubled in two
years. A planting of about 2,000 Dutch irises, with some Spanish
and tingitana were given a 3-inch peat mulch the first year, and
these also gave us almost 100 per cent bloom. A trial digging in
the fall, showed quite remarkable increase.

7. unguicularis, or stylosa (not bulbous, but of interest in N. E.)
grew splendidly for four years — with nary a bloom! We were
about to give it up as hopeless for this locality, when several plants
surprised us with good blossoms last spring. This is grown with
no protection, except some pines to the northwest. So “ye of little
faith ’ ’ — have courage !

Mrs. L. W. Kellogg.

[571

Iris dichotoma

My report on Iris dichotoma is that it is entirely hardy here
without protection. Bought seedlings from H. S. Jackson in 1925,
one plant is still standing where it was originally. Plant is now
perhaps a foot across, the clump has not grown larger in several
years. This is in a very dry, well-drained spot, and has not been
surrounded by self-sown seedlings as in a moister part of the gar¬
den, also where the soil was better, but the mother plants did not
winter so well there. Have had it in bloom on old plants as early
as July 9th and the newer plants carried it through into Septem¬
ber. In 1932 the Siberian, Florrie Riddler, bloomed until July 5th
and that was the year I recorded the Vesper Iris opening on the
ninth. Have been trying for iris from April until freezing, hence
my records. It has become quite a habit to save the seed from
dichotoma and pass it out to garden club members when I happen
to be invited to tell about iris. Most of the reports are success
with the venture. Of course if they are not interested they just
forget to ever speak of it. Have never bothered to sow seed, there
was always plenty of the self-sown seedlings coming up everywhere
near, and all mine have been true to type, no decided variations. It
has been the center of interest at some flower shows at three o ’clock
when a crowd would be waiting to see it open.

Mrs. W. O. Dumont, Des Moines, Iowa.

I have Iris dichotoma planted two years ago in my garden. It
was a commercial size, from Robert Way man, and the first summer
did not bloom or appear to grow much. We have had two severe
drought years and I do not water my iris at all. Last spring it
made fine growth and we had only one rain over a period of nine
weeks, then only one for another very long period during the grow¬
ing season. However, it bloomed and was in bloom for a very long
period of time. I hope to increase my stock as it blooms at a time
when there was little else in my garden, the extreme heat and dry
winds of middle summer making it difficult to grow many of the
annuals that should bloom at that time.

I saved and planted seed which were plentiful. I keep six hives
of bees in my garden and hardly have an iris that will not seed
if I let it. Lots of our bearded iris seed burned last summer, lit¬
erally cooked in the pods, but we were able to save some which were
partly shaded by some cherry trees.

[58]

I bought seedlings of Iris dichotoma from a local florist and
nurserymen three years ago which turned out to be blackberry
lily, but I was not sorry as they are perfectly happy and have
spread and bloomed and I understand they are difficult in some
gardens here.

Mrs. C. L. Henderson, Wichita, Kansas.

I have grown Iris dichotoma for a dozen years now and find it
true perennial. As this plant hails from central Asia its hardiness
cannot be questioned, and it is also very drouth resistant. I am
growing it on upland silt loam and where it has good drainage.
The original clumps are now a foot across and throw up several
dozen stems, averaging 44 inches in height. There is a wealth of
bloom, in the evening only, some stems producing up to 24 flowers,
which open in succession. Masses of seedlings sprout around the
clumps in the spring. Color varies slightly from light to dark
bluish purple. The creamy white, dotted dark purple, is a trifle
larger, and comes also true from seed. I have not attended any
crosses between the two varieties.

H. P. Sass, Washington, Nebraska.

I can’t help putting in my word for dichotoma ; it has been very
permanent here. Seeds and seedlings are produced in abundance.
The form I have is the lilac on creamy white, not dead white nor
true creamy white either. I have been on the trail of mellita for a
long time ; hope it comes through the winter in Maryland.

Robert Schreiner, St. Paul, Minn.

Iris dichotoma with me is not very permanent, usually two-three
years. The second year they are at their best, flowering early and
late. The fourth year the plants are not so strong and usually
die. They usually do not increase to more than five or six stalks
here. They do not self sow. Possibly we disturb the ground
around them too much. We have had some flowers white marked
a decided brown, with no lavender spots. I did not save seed of
these plants in particular so do not know what the progeny might
be. Yes, old plants do seem to flower earlier than seedlings. Our
soil is not especially well drained, being fairly flat and rather
heavy.

Carl Starker, Jennings Lodge, Ore.

[59]

I have often wondered why we heard so little of 7. stylosa. Mine
blooms off and on all winter, plants set in the fall of ’31 bloomed
January 21, 1933, and on into May. Started again in November
and bloomed until middle of December and now, Jan. 22, 1934,
are full of buds and will open as soon as we have a few warm
days. Such a lovely thing to find in the midst of winter! February
will bring reticulata, March tuberosa and persica, then lovely
Bucharica. I have 7. dichotoma from seeds sown Dec. 18, 1927,
potted last of January, 1928, bloomed fall of that year. Increases
each year in size of plant and number of stalks of bloom. Not car¬
ing much for it, I cleaned up what I think were seedlings. Will
pay more attention to it this year.

I have 7. tenax, 7. bracteata, 7. Douglasiana and the Louisiana
species from seed. Came freely and easily and 7. tenax bloomed in
about fifteen months. Now I am hunting seeds of 7. Rosenbachiana
which Dykes says is white with crimson markings and which I
cannot find.

... I think I only lack the fall-blooming irises to have them
every month of the year and 7. stylosa takes care of more months
than any other kind.

Mrs. Frank Gould, Towson, Md.

Since a week ago, I have looked many times at the bulbous iris
bed, for Dutch Iris, Wedgewood opened its first bloom then and
will have reached its peak in a few days. This is a medium blue
with large deep yellow signal ; flower six inches across, height
thirty inches. Before Wedgewood is entirely gone, Adriaen Backer,
a fine lilac to lavender will come in. And so the procession will
continue until the middle of April, varieties coming into bloom
at five to ten day intervals as follows: Yellow Queen, Hotchenburg,
white standards, yellow falls; White Excelsior; Albert Cuyp,
white ; Imperator, dark blue ; D. Haring, white ; Reconnaissance,
bronze ; Thunderbolt, bronze ; Cajanus, yellow. The last six come
almost together, the flowers vary from three and one-lialf to five
inches across and the height from twenty-eight to thirty inches
except that I have had stalks of Cajanus thirty-nine inches tall
when shaded from the afternoon sun. None of these irises are
permanent with us for they all sooner or later get a mosaic disease
which spoils the clear color of the petals with splashes of darker
color and weakens the plant so that stems are short and flowers

[60]

imperfect. Imperator and Cajanus are the most resistant to this
disease. At present, I am growing the Dutch and Spanish irises
in an elevated bed, insulated from the ground with crushed rock
so that the bulbs can remain undisturbed and dry in the summer
time. Before I had this bed they were set out the 15th of October
and dug when they began to die down. This elevated bed is used
also for Regelio-cyclus and pogo cyclus irises and for ranunculus
and anemone bulbs, each to its own section, which can be watered
separately as needed.

I am growing a couple of dozen Louisiana irises, including tiie
older varieties and hybrids, as fulva, foliosa, hexagona, Purpurea,
Dorothea K. Williamson, and some of Dr. F. F. Williams’ seedlings.
The newer varieties were acquired late last year, 1933, so I can’t
say much regarding them except that as I saw them in the gardens,
they seemed to have plenty of bloom to make them well worth while.
Yinicolor, laurentia and chrysophoenicia were especially attractive
to me. I have had hexagona (blue) two forms, purpurea and citri-
cristata alba (Nichols) or Mr. Milliken’s white hexagona going on
three years and I think they make fine garden irises. There is a
bloom stalk to each three leaf fans average. I would say that the
floral display would be about the same as for the wild blue flag —
versicolor — in the Northeastern States. 1 start new plants right
after bloom is finished and expect them to have formed a semi¬
circle of rhizomes by the following bloom time and to give me
from six to a dozen blooms. The second year they should give
upwards of thirty blooms. I plant them three to four feet apart
and find it desirable to start them over again after the second
bloom season so that they won’t intermingle.

I grow stylosas and have had foetidissima but have given it up
because of the seed coming up all over the place (birds). Gave
up pseudacorus because it wanted all the food and water from
at least a six foot circle of ground.

Commander Monroe, Chula Vista, Calif.

The Little Widow.

“Here and there among the broad-leafed flag Irises appear the
long narrow leaves of the Little Widow, La Vedorina of Italian
gardens, no longer allowed to be an Iris, and obliged even to
change her sex and reappear as Hermodactylus tuber osus. ... I
love this weird little flower, made up of the best imitation I have

[61]

(See page 65 J

Lilian A. Guernsey

JAPANESE STENCIL BASED

[62]

ON IBIS KAEMPFERI

ever seen in vegetable tissues of dull green silk and black velvet — -
in fact it looks as if it had been plucked from the bonnet of some
elderly lady of quiet tastes in headgear. I am fond of picking
just enough for a vaseful to stand among other vases holding
daffodils; both the sombre Little Widow and the gay bachelor
Daffs gain by the contrast. ” — E. A. Bowles, My Garden in Spring.

[Iris tuberosa referred to in this charming paragraph written
from an English garden is declared hardy by Bailey’s Encyclo¬
paedia of Horticulture. — Editors.]

Sir Michael Foster as Nonconformist

Of this plant so attractive to the plant lover, Sir Michael Foster
says in Bulbous Irises, “It was separated by Salisbury as a dis¬
tinct genus with the name Her mo dactylics tuberosus, because the
ovary is not as in Iris, divided completely into three chambers
by three septa or partitions meeting in the middle along the
whole length of the organ. The partitions are imperfect, not
meeting in the upper part of the ovary, which thus consists of a
single chamber, partly divided by the projecting partitions. Other¬
wise all the characters of the plant are those of an Iris ; and, since
the lack of complete fusion of the partitions of the ovary may
occur accidently in many specimens of Iris, it seems unreasonable
to lay such stress on this feature. I shall therefore continue to
consider it as an Iris. But, as I said it is not strictly a bulbous
Iris ; if you dig a plant when the foliage dies down you will
find, not a bulb, but an irregular brown tuber like a small, hard,
deformed potato, the mass being often made up of two, three, or
more parts joined together like the fingers of the hand, or perhaps
more like the starfish. . . . The plant has one very striking feature :
the leaf is four-sided, with a horny point like that of 7. reticulata ;
indeed, the difference between the leaves of the two plants is
relatively small, and a casual observer might easily confound the
two. The flower, again, draws near to a member of the Reticulata
group, namely, 7. Danfordiae ; the inner segments or standards are
reduced to mere bristles, so that at first sight they seem to be
absent. On the other hand, the plant betrays its affinities to 7. si-
syrinchium, in the filaments of the anthers being in part of their
course united together. We may place side by side with these
structural features the geographical distribution of the species.

[63]

Lilian A. Guernsey (See page 65)

JAPANESE STENCIL BASED ON IRIS LAEVIGATA

[64]

While the Reticulata group, as we have seen, is confined to the east,
and the Xiphium group to the west, Iris tuberosa stretches from
almost the extreme west a long way towards the east. Beginning
at the west in Southern France, we may trace it through the
Riviera, Corsica, Sicily, Middle and Southern Italy, past Dal¬
matia to Greece and the Grecian Islands, and even to Turkey. So
far as I know, however, it is absent from Asia Minor. In width
of distribution it is second only to I. sisyrinchium, and, like that,
is probably a somewhat ancient Iris. ’ ’

“The sunny side of my small rock-garden has long groups of
Othon-no'psis, and the wooly-leafed Hieracium villosum and Proph¬
et-flower ( Arnebia ) and good stretches of Achillea umbellata and
of Iris crist at a, without doubt one of the loveliest among the smaller
members of its beautiful family, and of the flowers that bloom in
May. This little Iris is only five inches high, and the flowers are
two and a half inches across, so that they look large for the whole
size of the plant. When placed as it likes best, in a sunny rock-
shelf in nearly pure leaf-mould it shows its appreciation of kind
treatment by free growth and abundance of bloom. The leaves,
at blooming time only four inches high, though much taller after¬
wards, are in neat flat little sheaves of from three to five, one leaf
always taking the lead. The clear lilac-blue of the flower has a
daintily-clean look that is very charming, and taken in the hand
I always delight in the delicate beauty of the raised and painted
ornament of the lower petals. In the middle of the broadest part
is a white pool with a strong purple edging ; the white turns to
yellow, and runs in a lane an eighth of an inch wide down into
the throat, between two little whitish rocky ridges. The yellow
stripe is also decorated with a tiny raised serpent wriggling down
its middle line, and with a few fine short strokes of reddish-brown.
— Gertrude Jekyll, Home and Garden.

Iris in Design

In spite of comment to the contrary, we follow with another
example of the use of iris in design, this time from Japan. It is
enough that some may sniff, let them. One of the greatest pleasures
in gardening lies in seeing and seeing fully. To this end no one
can help so much as the artist for he is gifted with a discrimination
in seeing that comes only after long years of practice.

[65]

Two patterns are shown, designs for stencils used on the common
cotton towelling of that country. They are of interest to us in
that one is based on Iris laevigata and the other on Iris Kaempferi.
They are of interest to the designer of stencils in that the former
shows a typical direct cut producing a silhouette-like pattern and
the other an all-over cutting that must be held together with the
fine hair mesh that is used to hold together such slender all-over
patterns. They are also interesting in that the first shows how
faithfully the stencil cutter has carried over the brush lines in his
work, while the second shows a more knife-like cutting with
sharper more arbitrary edges. By a study of the first pattern,
how much one might learn for the preparation of iris for silhou¬
ettes, for arrangement so that leaves might be bent to spread away
from the flower heads with curves that contrast properly with
the angles of the flower itself.

NOTE

At the meeting of the Board of Directors on December 9, 1933, it
seemed advisable for the Board to reassume the burden of serving as a
committee on Awards as in the past. That Dr. Everett, Messrs. Duffy
and Wallace, and Mrs. Hires of the 1933 commitee on Awards and Mrs.
Peckham and Mr. Wister of the 1932 committee would thus carry on the
successful tradition already established seems most fortunate. The above
policy incorporates most comprehensively both old regulations and the
major recommendations of the 1933 committee to whom we owe so deep
a debt of gratitude.

This last year and particularly in respect to this bulletin the Society
can appreciate what it owes to certain of its active members. For two
issues we have missed notes from Sherman Duffy (I have hopes for
October). Mrs. Peckham has been in the throes of moving and the recent-
loss of her mother prevented the completion of her customary reports
even in this delayed issue. Mr. Morrison, who assumed the duties of
Secretary on January 1st, was also promoted to the head of his division
in the Department of Agriculture on the same date. We congratulate
him but also bewail the fact that, with an almost impossible burden of
new organization in his office both the Iris Society and the American
Horticultural Society must find him so irritatingly less active in their
interests.

I am glad that I can promise less delay for the July Bulletin. Its
subject is California and I hope that you will like as well as I the work
of my Associate Editor, Mrs. Lothrop. Copy, by the way, goes to the
printer by June 10, so that may expect it shortly. — Editor.

April, 1934.

[66]

OUR BULLETINS

With the selection of a new printer and a new secretary last
year onr stock of old bulletins (amount to two tons) was
shipped to your editor for storage and such distribution as
members might, select. Hence make your checks payable to the
A.I.S. but send your requests to R. S. Sturtevant, Groton, Mass.

In going over the inventory there are varied numbers of
certain issues available due parti}7 to changes of policy as to
the size of an addition and party of course to the quality —
the popularity — of certain issues. Nos. 3, 5, 10, 47, 48, and 49
must be held for complete sets ($25.00) and it seems advisable
to hold also Nos. £9, and 34 for inclusion in special sets en¬
titled, Descriptions, Breeders, Beardless Irises, Fertility Records,
etc. Prizes and contents of all bulletins will be found in the
January, 1933, issue.

Beardless Irises. Seven Bulletins, Nos. 11, 17, 28, 32, 34,
40, and 44. 360 pp. Ill. $3.00. Although it has never been our
policy to omit current notes and reports from even special issues
devoted to one subject these six bulletins offer probably more
than any other source of concentrated information on the Apogons,
their many named varieties and their adaptability to varied
localities. And each year sees an added interest on the part
of members. There are new species from Louisiana and new
hybrids from Mrs, Branin and Drs. Berry and Williams in
California and from T. A. Washington of Nashville varied hybrids
of real beauty. No. 11 published in 1924 was a review and brief
description of all known Apogons and included also an article
on Sibirica from the pen of Mr. Dykes. In 1930 under the
heading of The Wild Garden there were similar notes on all
the new species from Louisiana and Nos. 17, 32, 40, and 44 we
have noteworthy contributions on Japanese Irises. Prof. Miya-
zawa is internationally known for his study of this group and
Dr. Reed of the Brooklyn Botanic Garden has classified and
described them as they are grown both here and in Japan. It is,
however, the translation of the Album of Hana-shobu (1920)
which has made our Bulletin known to all English speaking
botanists. Again we are to thank Dr. Reed for this contribu¬
tion and as he still is working with the Irises you may find
one of the finest collections in the world at the Brooklyn Botanic
Garden.

[67]

COMMERCIAL DIRECTORY

All of the dealers listed below are members of The American
Iris Society. If you are buying iris for your garden, it should be your
particular pleasure to make your purchases from the dealers who have
worked with and supported your society. Your officers and directors
invite your particular attention to this list. They also ask a favor.
When you order, tell the dealer you saw his name in the Bulletin
and do him a favor by not asking for a catalog unless you mean
business.

D. M. ANDREWS

Iris: Gilead, Rusty Gold and
Other Indispensables

BOULDER COLORADO

CHERRY HILL NURSERIES

Thurlows and Strangers, Inc.

Fine Peonies, Iris, Phlox and
Perennials

WEST NEWBURY MASS.

FAIRMOUNT IRIS
CARDENS

Rare Bearded and Beardless Iris
New Hemerocallis and Poppies

LOWELL, MASSACHUSETTS

FILLMORE CARDENS

FINE IRIS AND PEONIES
MRS. MABEL WERNIMONT

OHIOWA NEBRASKA

MELVIN C. CEISER
IRIS

Peonies and Tulips
Fair Chance Farm

BELOIT KANSAS

GLEN ROAD IRIS
CARDENS

Miss Grace Sturtevant

Outstanding Novelties

Standard Varieties

WELLESLEY FARMS MASS.

HEARTHSTONE IRIS
CARDENS

M. Berry Doub
Fine Iris Growers

Introducing "Hearthstone Copper”
HAGERSTOWN MD.

HILL IRIS AND PEONY
FARM

The Best in Irises

Our Specialty: Reliable Fall Bloomers
LAFONTAINE KANSAS

THE IRIS CARDEN

SELECTED BEARDED
IRIS

OVERLAND PARK KANSAS

LONCFIELD IRIS FARM

Williamson Originations
Best Bearded Varieties and Species

BLUFFTON, INDIANA

C. S. MILLIKEN

SUNNYSIDE CARDENS

Southern California Iris Gardens
Introducers of Easter Morn, Lady
Paramount, Sierra Blue and Others
970 New York Ave.
PASADENA CALIF.

L. Merton Gage

New and Standard Varieties of Iris
NATICK - MASSACHUSETTS

NORTHBROOK CARDENS,
INC.

Peonies and Iris

World’s Best Varieties

Dundee Road Northbrook, Ill.

Tel. Northbrook 160

THE TINGLE NURSERY
CO.

Azaleas, Boxwood, Magnolias and
Other Choice Plants

PITTSVILLE MARYLAND

OVER-the-GARDEN-WALL

Recent Bearded Iris
Various Species

60 N. Main Street
WEST HARTFORD CONN.

ROYAL IRIS CARDENS

Louisiana and Other Species
Finest Bearded Iris

CAMILLUS N. Y.

QUALITY CARDENS

Owned by Mrs. Douglas Pattison
Newest, Rarest and Finest Iris

FREEPORT ILLINOIS

CARL SALBACH

Introducer of Mitchell Iris
Also Dahlias, Gladiolus, and Seeds

657 Woodmont Avenue
BERKELEY CALIF.

JACOB SASS - SASS IRIS

Maple Road Gardens
Route 7, Benson Station

UPTON CARDENS

(Mrs. G. N. Marriage)

IRIS — New Hybrids
ALPINES — From Colorado Rockies

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO.

TREHOLME CARDENS

New Rare and Good Old Irises
Peonies of Distinction
Earl Woodell Sheets, Owner
1831 Lamont Street, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D. C.

C. F. WASSENBERC

Iris and Peonies

Largest Collection in the Central
West

VAN WERT OHIO

ROBERT WAYMAN

IRISES

The Best of All Types
BAYSIDE, LONG ISLAND, N. Y.

IS THIS YOUR
SPACE?

OMAHA

NEBRASKA

THE AMERICAN
HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY

INVITES to membership all persons who are seriously inter¬
ested in horticulture. For its members it publishes an illus¬
trated quarterly, The National Horticultural Magazine in which
will be found a more diverse and interesting collection of horti¬
cultural material than in any other American garden publication.
It was written by and for its members. Among its regular features
are articles on: Conifers, California plants, American natives, iris
species, narcissus, succulents, lilies, unusual shrubs and trees, rock
plants, ivies, and many more. Particular features for 1934 will
include a horticultural review of fuchsias and preliminary reports
on tulip species. Membership is three dollars the year. Checks
should be made to the Society and sent to Mr. C. C. Thomas,
211 Spruce Street, Takoma Park, Washington, D. C.

IRISES

KATISHA, STANWIX —

INTRODUCTIONS FOR 1933
Fairylea (1933), Guyasuta (1931),
Edgewood, Elsinore, Lodestar, Sere¬
nade and other varieties.

Descriptive list on request.

C. H. HALL, Ingomar, Pa.

J. MARION SHULL

Artist, Plant Breeder, Specializing in

Iris

207 Raymond Street Chevy Chase, Md.

Productions include Coppersmith, Dune
Sprite, Elaine, Julia Marlowe, L’Aiglon,
Moon Magic, Morning Splendor, Nocturne,
Phosphor, Seqnoiah, Sylvia Lent, Tropic
Seas, Waterfall.

Author, “Rainbow Fragments, A Garden
Book of the Iris.” Price $3.50

Robert Wayman’s
IRISES

1,200 Varieties
Hundreds of Rare Irises
Write for free planting list.

ROBERT WAYMAN

Box 26

Bayside, Long Island, N. Y.

THE IRIS SOCIETY

(of England)

Application for member-
. ship in The Iris Society
may be sent direct to the
American Iris Society office.
Make check for dues ($2.8 5)
payable to American Iris So-
cietv; send it to B. Y. Mor-
rison, 116 Chestnut Street,
Takoma Park, D. C. Mark
it plainly “For dues for The
Iris Society (of England)”
and print your name and ad¬
dress.

THE AMERICAN ROSE SOCIETY

INVITES

MEMBERS of the American Iris Society who also enjoy roses to
unite with it in improving and furthering the enjoyment of
roses throughout the world.

The American Rose Annual, sent to each member every year,
describes all the new roses and is packed with information and in¬
spiration for rose growers.

The American Rose Quarterly deals with current exhibitions,
meetings, rose pilgrimages, roster of members, etc.

"What Every Rose Grower Should Know,” the Society’s book
of instructions for rose-growing, is sent to each member.

The Committee of Consulting Rosarians will give free advice on
all rose subjects.

Dues $3.50 per Year; Three Years for $10.00

Address

SECRETARY, AMERICAN ROSE SOCIETY

Harrisburg, Penna.

SPECIAL NOTICE

UNTIL the present issue of the New Peony Manual is exhausted
the Directors of the American Peony Society have reduced the
price to $3.15, delivered. This is a reduction of 50% from former
price and was prompted to meet present conditions and make it
possible for every garden lover to obtain a copy, which at present
price is below cost of production.

This manual is the greatest book of its kind and will
prove of great value to any peony admirer. Membership
in the American Peony Society, four splendid bulletins,
together with the peony manual for $6.00.

Act quick if you desire a manual as at this low price
we expect to soon dispose of the balance of books on hand.
Address all communications and remittances to:

W. F. Christman, Secretary ,

American Peony Society,

Northbrook, Ill.

The American Iris Society

♦

/ I LTHOUGH ALL READERS of the BULLETIN are
-*■ supposed to know that the annual dues of the
Society are three dollars payable by the cal¬
endar year, it has been called to our attention
that there is a chance that someone who is not
a member may read your copy and wonder
how he too may become a subscriber. It is for
that reader that this last page has been added.
If you happen to be such a reader, let us
assure you that the Society welcomes to mem¬
bership all persons who are interested in iris
who feel that special knowledge of iris would
be welcome in their gardening.

Make your check or money order payable to the American
Iris Society and send to Mr. John Ferguson, Monumental
Printing Company, 1918 Harford Ave., Baltimore, Md.
Please follow this instruction. It will help us all in the
record keeping.

BULLETIN

OF THB

American Iris Society

JULY, 1934

CALIFORNIA GARDENS
NO. 52

Editor, R. S. STURTEVANT
Associate Editor, LENA M. LOTHROP

CONTENTS

Comment and Remark, The Editor . 1

Twelve Years of Iris Breeding in California, Methods and Records, Ed¬
ward 0. Essig . . 3

Southern Natives in California, F. F. Williams, M. D . 30

Two ' California Species, J. N. Giridlian . 34

Adventures with the Dwarfs, Lena M. Lothrop . 38

At Whitehill. C. G. White . . . . 44

Chula Vista Goes Iris-minded, Com. John M. Monroe . 53

Irises in the Garden, Sydney B. Mitchell . 57

Science Series No. 14:

Chromosome Numbers in Native American and Introduced Species and
Cultivated Varieties of Iris, L. F. Bandolph . 61

The Breeding of Yellow Irises, Sydney B. Mitchell . 67

Varietal Notes:

New Varieties in Northern California, S. L. Jory . 72

California Irises in Massachusetts, B. S. Sturt evant . 74

An Iris Jaunt, Mrs. Thomas Nesmith . 78

Iris Rumors in Southern California . 85

The Family Tree . 89

The Vocational Guide . 93

To Read or Not to Read . 108

Our Bulletins . 109

Tid-Bits . 109

Published Quarterly by

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY, 1918 HARFORD AVE., BALTIMORE, MD.

Entered as second-class matter January, 1934, at the Post Office at Baltimore, Md.,

under the Act of March 3, 1879.

#3.00 the Year — 50 Cents per Copy for Members

OFFICERS, 1934

Directors :

Term expiring 1934 :

Sherman R. Duffy

Mrs. W. H. Peekham

A. P. Saunders

R. S. Sturtevant

Term expiring 1935:

Mrs. J. Edgar Hires

B. Y. Morrison

John C. Wister

Term expiring 1936:

Dr. II. H. Everett

Dr. J. H. Kirkland

J. B. Wallace, Jr.
Richardson Wright

President — John C. Wister, Wister St. and Clarkson
Philadelphia, Pa.

Vice-President — Dr. H. H. Everett, 1104 Sharp Bldg.,

Avenue, Germantown

Lincoln, Nebr.

Secretary —

Treasurer — Richardson Wright, House & Garden, Graybar Bldg., New York
City.

Regional Vice-Presidents —

2. Col. J. C. Nicholls, 114 Overton Rd., Ithaca, N. Y.

3. M. E. Douglas, Rugby Place, Woodbury, N. J.

4. J. Marion Shull, 208 Raymond St., Chevy Chase, Md.

5. Mrs. James R. Bachman, 2646 Alston Drive, Atlanta, Ga.

6. Dr. A. C. Kinsey, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.

7. C. P. Connell, 2001 Grand Ave., Nashville, Tenn.

8. Robert Schreiner, R. 1, Riverview Station, St. Paul, Minn.

9. Euclid Snow, R. P. D. 2, Hinsdale, Ill.

10. Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs, 3715 Turtle Creek Blvd., Dallas, Texas.

11. David C. Petrie, R. P. D. 2, Boise, Idaho.

12. Dr. P. A. Loomis, Colorado Springs, Colo.

13. Carl Starker, Jennings Lodge, Ore.

14. Prof. E. O. Essig, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.

15. William Miles, Ingersoll, Ontario, Canada.

Chairmen of Committees:

Scientific — Dr. A. E. Waller, 233 So. 17th St., Columbus, Ohio.

Election — Dr. C. Stuart Gager, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Membership and Publicity— -Dr. II. H. Everett, 1102 Sharp Bldg., Lin¬
coln, Neb.

Registration — C. E. P. Gersdorff, 1825 No. Capitol St., Washington, D. C.
Test Garden & Display Garden —

Exhibition — Mrs. W. L. Karcher, 1011 W. Stephenson St., Preeport, Ill.

Bibliography — Mrs. W. II. Peekham, The Lodge, Skylands Parm, Ster-
lington, N. Y.

Awards — Dr. H. H. Everett.

Editor — R. S. Sturtevant, Groton, Mass.

Editorial Board:

S. R. Duffy
Mrs. J. E. Hires

B. Y. Morrison
R. S. Sturtevant

LANTERN SLIDES — Rental Fee (to members) $10.00. Apply to Mrs.
K. H. Leigh, Mo. Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Mo.

library

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY ES

Garden

COMMENT AND REMARK

cr?

■ Largely by force of circumstances I have been editor since 1920.
There were almost four years of monthly pages in The Flower
Grower and this is our 52nd Bulletin. With very few exceptions
I have had the doubtful pleasure of collecting material, contribut¬
ing material, preparing it all for the printer, and proof reading
it at least twice. Of recent years my associate editors have assisted
nobly and especially in the collection of material.

The average member seems to think that an editor “ selects”
material. In this case he often solicits it and, as in the last issue,
must often reprint articles from other publications. Of what he
receives, the acceptance is “99 per cent pure” (except it be poetry
of which he is no adequate judge). Hence when you wonder why
so and so appears so frequently in print, ask yourself “Have I
written and sent anything at all?”

Like the theory that we “select” contributors and material, is an
even finer one, that of regular, regional reports. Regional Vice-
Presidents have been with us from the beginning. Perhaps one
in ten has made any sort of an annual report. Can one expect
more of a member or even an associate editor than of an officer?
As a matter of fact even among the accredited judges, our most
experienced and loyal members, rarely do more than 50 per cent
fulfill their accepted obligations.

I regret that I have no report of the Lincoln meeting. There are,
however, rumors of a good time, rumors that numerical ratings are
losing favor, rumors that we need zonal ratings rather than
country wide averages. Again an excellent theory but when no
originator or introducer can rate his own — well — there are prac¬
tically no other accredited judges available in many localities to
give the total of five or seven ratings required. Both the breeder
and the grower stand, or fall, by their introductions and they
know their varieties while I visit and judge (in five minutes).
What know I of special culture, of weather resistance, rate of in¬
crease, or average performance and yet my judgment is to be
counted and theirs not. We need the judgment of every expe¬
rienced breeder and grower on every variety even their own.

The Editor.

[i]

EASTER MORN

A warm white from the yellow side of the color scale. The large

flaring falls are notable

[2]

TWELVE YEARS OF INTENSIVE IRIS BREEDING IN
CALIFORNIA— METHODS AND RECORDS

Edward O. Essig

■ In 1922 I first became interested in irises and decided to col¬
lect a representative lot of commercial varieties in order to under¬
take hybridization. This adventure was wholly independent of any
outside influence since I did not know a single iris grower or
breeder and had no knowledge of the American Iris Society or
anyone who knew irises. But having been reared on a farm I did
know something of plant culture and this fact strengthened my
desire to experiment in this particular type of original research
work. Accordingly, catalogues and price lists were soon obtained.
These were followed in a few weeks by a collection of some fifty
common, well known varieties from the east and the northwest.
Shortly afterwards, too, I learned that a colleague and neighbor,
Sydney B. Mitchell, was an authority on irises and that he had a
splendid collection of novelties and new creations. A trip to his
garden in iris blooming season gave me one of the greatest thrills
ever experienced. Up to this time only the common white and blue
flags had been seen in culture and the common native California
species under natural conditions. In the Mitchell garden were irises
never before dreamed of by the writer : plicatas, variegatas,
amoenas, yellows, pink-toned hues, blends, and various other un¬
usual color combinations. It was as if walking into a new world,
and, being truly impressed and enthused, I decided at once to se¬
cure all of the varieties obtainable. As a result there were assem¬
bled that first year about 300 varieties. The following spring
(1923) there was a creditable showing of flowers and hybridization
was begun on a large scale. Every single flower was cross-fertilized.
No pains were spared to test every variety, not only once, but many
times. That first year more trials were made than in any succeed¬
ing season, it being fully expected that the major portion would
prove futile. As a result there arose from the iris plants a forest
of seed stalks and pods. Visitors marvelled at the sight, for few, if
any, had ever seen irises in seed before. Great pleasure and satis¬
faction were gained in watching the progress of growth from day
to day. Even in spite of the many hints that seed pods do not
necessarily mean seed— a truth which has been learned thoroughly,

— there was a joy in watching the green pods take on shape and
size. Approximately 1,000 crosses were made of which 392 produced
seed-bearing pods of a great variety of shapes and sizes. Some
were the size of small cucumbers, the largest measuring about 5
inches in length and 2 inches in diameter. After properly drying
the pods in the sun the seeds were carefully counted and put up
in small envelopes for planting. The greatest number of seeds from
a single pod was 102, but the average per pod was 17+ • Many of
the pods were very small and contained only 1 or 2 seeds. From
these crosses 6,854 seeds were obtained. Each pod represented an
individual cross, both parents being known, and was given a serial
number, and all of the seedlings resulting from the same were desig¬
nated by that number. Outstanding individual seedlings, reserved
for further tests, were also given a letter as 1A, IB, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C,
etc. Since no more than a dozen of any single cross were ever
retained after the first blooming season there was never any embar¬
rassment for lack of letters in any given series.

Pollination

In cross-pollination great care was exercised to avoid mixing
the pollen. The entire stamens or anthers were removed, contained
in small pill boxes, and properly labeled as to variety. In applying
the pollen the anther was held in a pair of forceps and the pollen
surface drawn across the lip of the stigma in such a manner as to
leave the entire surface of the latter completely covered. From one
to three or more anthers may be necessary to supply pollen for a
single flower. Mixed pollen was never used, although it would
seem possible to get a greater variety of combinations by such a
practice. It was felt that continued progress could be made only
when all of the parental factors were exactly known and I think
the soundness of this idea has been borne out by experimentation.
A small white cardboard tag, bearing the name or number of the
pollen parent, the date, and other pertinent information regarding
the character of the seed plant or flower, the pollen, or the weather,
is attached to the stem of the fertilized flower. Every flower may
be pollinated on a single stalk and all may produce seed, but it
is better not to over tax the stalks, but rather to limit the number of
seed pods to three or four to each. There is a vast difference in the
character of the pollen and the stigmatic surface, or lip, in dif¬
ferent hybrids. Pollen may be abundant, soft, fluffy, and readily
applied, or it may be hard and almost impossible of removal from

[4]

IRIS ALBICANS Lange, 1860

This fragrant white iris is commonly grown in the milder regions of this
country and the old world. It is native of the Mediterranean regions, where
it has teen extensively planted in the cemeteries of the Arabs and the Moors.
It grows well in California but repeated attempts to cause it to produce seed
failed. It blooms early, the photograph being taken on March 3, 1923.

the anther. In a great many flowers there is no pollen at all, which
deficiency is often a distressing thing in continued breeding ex¬
periments. Soft, fluffy pollen is readily removed by rubbing the
anther across the stigma, but in the case of hard pollen it is often
necessary to press out the mass on the surface of the anther before
applying it to the stigmatic surface. Experimentation lias shown
that both kinds of pollen are fertile and will produce seeds, but of
course apparently all types fail with certain sterile flowers. A
small soft brush may be used to apply the pollen, but it is much
quicker and more satisfactory to follow the above directions. Much
has been said and written as to the proper time for applying pollen,

[5]

but my records show that success is possible almost anytime after
the flower opens and as long as the stigma remains in good condi¬
tion, even though the standards and falls have begun to wilt. A
slight injury or even a split in the stigmal lip seems to offer no
serious difficulties in fertilization. However, I prefer to apply the
pollen soon after the flower completely opens. Rarely the pollen
may require a day or more to properly mature after the flower
opens, but this is the exception. More often it is best a few hours
after the flower unfolds. Pollen has been kept in open pill boxes
for over a month without apparent deterioration, but the exact
duration of viability will probably have to be ascertained for each
type of variety.

As to the proper condition of the weather for cross-pollinization,
there is little to say except that it appears to make no difference.
Experiments were made on dull cloudy or foggy days, during
cold, rainy and windy periods of considerable duration, as well as
during all sorts of warm, sunny weather. Success was obtained
under all such conditions. Naturally one prefers the forenoon of
a bright, warm day for such work. Then the garden is at its best
and the hybridizer is in his paradise. Under such auspices the
crosses should be more successful for it is then that the bees choose
to serve nature in a similar way. It is not at all necessary to
mutilate the flowers in any manner since the removal of the anthers
is no wise disfigures them. It is often necessary to make a great
many crosses to insure a few seeds so that in such cases one should
utilize every flower of a desirable new parent.

In California few insects visit the iris flowers to gather pollen
and nectar so there is little chance of natural cross-fertilization.
Therefore it is unnecessary to bag the flowers after the pollen has
been applied. Bagging, too, has the disadvantage of affording pro¬
tection to aphids which seriously injure the seed pods.

Care of the Seed Pods

Aside from cultivation, fertilization, and irrigation some atten¬
tion should be given the developing seed pods. Each flower stalk
should be staked as soon as pollination has begun. The tags in¬
dicating the pollen parents are usually attached to the flowers
just above the ovaries. When the flowers dry up the tags remain
attached to the fragile dead portions and must then be removed
and attached at the base of the young seed pod where it is secure
until harvest. Rarely the string of the tag may almost sever the

[6]

Bialgar (upper left). From six seed pods, 50 seeds were produced, none ger¬
minated . Purissima (upper right). From this stalk 138 seeds and 34 seed¬
lings — a dependable seeder, hut produces no pollen here. Avalon (lower left),
with six pods that yielded hut 32 seeds and 6 seedlings. Juniata (lower right),
much used hy Wm. Mohr in early work, with Mesopotamica gave Conquistador.

The above pods produced no seeds.

[7]

enlarging pod if carelessly tied about one end of, or the middle of,
the ovary. The remnants of the old withered flowers should be
removed as soon as dry, because during continued wet weather
they may be the starting point of rot which may subsequently
also attack the pod. The old skin-like spathes should also be re¬
moved since they afford a hiding place for aphids that often col¬
lect there in sufficient numbers to cause serious injury to the pods.
Aphids also collect under the bases of the leaves in the leaf axils
and forks of the stems, making it advisable to remove all of the
leaves from the upper half or two-thirds of the flower stalks. Such
removal of leaves in no wise appears to injure the stems and may
often also prevent fungus attacks and complete destruction before
the seeds are ripe. This care of the pods is one of the most inter¬
esting and important features of seed production.

In California almost exactly three months are required to mature
the seeds after pollination. When the pods begin to split at the
apex, exposing the seeds, they are ready for harvest. It is a sim¬
ple matter to break them off and place each one, with the accom¬
panying tag, in a small paper b$g, on the outside of which is
written the name of the seed parent and the date of harvest. The
bags are arranged with the open ends up in shallow boxes or
trays and placed in the sun to dry. Two or three weeks are re¬
quired for this process. For convenience in planting the dry seeds
are then transferred to small envelopes, 2x3 inches, on each of
which is written all of the necessary data, including the names of
the seed and pollen parents, date of pollination, date of harvest,
together with the number, size, shape, quality, and other peculiari¬
ties of the seeds. As soon as all of the lots of seeds are thus pre¬
pared they are serially numbered and ready to plant. For the
past ten years all of my iris seeds have been planted either on
Labor Day or on Admission Day (September 9th). At first two or
even three days were required to plant : now usually one day suffices.

Seed Beds

Iris seeds are planted in flower pots, cans, trays, flats, hotbeds,
cold frames, and the open ground. The writer prefers a cold frame,
the construction of which is illustrated in the accompanying photo¬
graphs. The frame is made of 1 x 12 clear redwood, usually 14 to
16 feet long and 3 feet wide. The bottom is covered with % inch
hardware cloth and the top is fitted with a movable frame of 1
inch galvanized chicken wire. The frame of the bed is only par¬

ts]

Seed pod of Alcazar X Tamerlan (top) ready' to harvest. This pod with
8 seeds harvested Sept. 22, 1924 from pollination June 20. It contained
8 seeds. Freshly-harvested seeds ( center ) of Alcazar X Tamerlan.
Some think that planted in this condition, they give quicker germination
and faster growing seedlings. A seed pod with 42 seeds of Trosuperha
X Conquistador (bottom) showing seed at harvest. Pollinated April

24, photographed June 25, 1924.

[9]

Dried seeds of Mesopotamia^ X Mme. Cheri (top). Of flat an¬
gular type. Seeds show certain relationships and are an aid in
determining parentage. These 45 seeds gave 17 plants. A7nhas-
sadeur X Oriflamme (center) rounded-elongate in shape. 47
seed gave 12 plants. Dried seeds of Iris stolonifera Maximowicz,
1880. (Iris leichtlini) characteristic of seeds of Begelia and

Oncooyclus Sections.

[10]

tially buried and the soil inside is elevated 4 to 6 inches above the
ground level to insure proper drainage. Our heavy adobe soil is
well mixed with sand and river peat to insure proper texture and
water-holding capacity. A small quantity of bone meal or well-
rotted, sifted cow-manure is added. A small amount of fertilizer
is beneficial in spite of the common claims that none whatever is
needed. The mixing is done while the soil is dry. After packing
and irrigating the ground, the seeds are planted % to 1 inch apart
and from % to % inch deep in rows 3 to 4 inches apart, covered,
and packed firmly with a block of wood 2 x 4 x 12 inches. Experi¬
ments were made using a mulch covering of Delta peat, German
peat, sand, screened well-rotted cow manure, sheep manure, finely
chopped straw, lawn clippings, sphagnum moss, leaf mold, and
coarsely woven burlap. All of these appeared to be marked im¬
provement over the bare soil, in that they prevented the formation
of a dry, hard crust during hot weather and a growth of moss
during the winter months. The use of lattice and cloth screens
over the beds made watering more laborious and appeared to add
little in hastening the germination of the seeds and the subsequent
growth of the plants. Prom the time the seeds are planted until
the young plants are transplanted the beds are never allowed to
dry, but are regularly watered once a day for months, or until the
winter rains set in. After the seedlings are removed the following
spring the beds are then usually allowed to dry out for several
months after which they are either remade and replanted, or, if
to be retained for another year’s germination, watering is re¬
sumed in September or October. At first the beds were remade
only after four years had elapsed, and some seeds germinated every
year. The first year yields the greatest number of seedlings, al¬
though in certain crosses, the larger number of seeds germinate
the second year from planting. Only a comparatively few seedlings
appear in the third and fourth years. Because of lack of room the
beds are usually retained but two years before they are remade
and replanted. In remaking the beds the top two or three inches
of soil are removed to eliminate any remaining viable seeds and the
soil is dried, thoroughly worked, and the necessary amounts of sand,
peat, and fertilizer added. The soil is then well watered before
planting, but this is for convenience only. Some hybridizers broad¬
cast the seed in small, narrow strips in the beds, but I prefer to
plant them in rows to avoid any possibilities of the seedlings being
mixed.

[ll]

Treating the Seeds Prior to Planting

Iris seeds are slow of germination and much time could be saved
by hastening the process. Delayed germination is probably due
to the thick, impervious coating or skin and the very hard texture
of the seed itself. To overcome these natural characteristics many
suggestions have been offered such as rupturing the outer seed coat,
treating the seeds in acids to destroy the coat, and planting the
seeds before they are allowed to harden. A number of experiments
were performed to determine the normal periods of germination
and if possible, also, a practical and effective method of insuring
quick and sure germination. Some of the results secured are given
in the following tabulation :

Germination Tests Over a Period of Years

Seeds left unmolested in seedbeds until germinated.
The plants were then removed.

No.

Cross

Number

of seeds
planted

1st

year

Germination

2nd 3rd

year year

4th

year

Miss Willmott X Sherbert ....

.... 25

226

Mrs. Haw X Eldorado .

.... 17

....

244

Oriflamme X Alcazar .

.... 36

....

245

Oriflamme X Alcazar .

.... 31

247

Oriflamme X Conquistador .

.... 36

334

Trosuperba X Conquistador ..

.... 39

....

417

Afterglow X Poiteau seedl. ..

.... 47

418

Afterglow X Mohr 20 .

.... 38

419

Afterglow X Opera .

.... 25

425

Amas X 'Sherbert .

.... 70

426

Amas X Sindjkha .

.... 58

....

428

Ambassadeur X Conquistador

.... 29

431

Ambassadeur X Gaudichau ....

.... 27

....

437

Ambassadeur X Oriflamme ....

.... 47

452

Balboa X Amas .

.... 81

453

Balboa X Gaudichau .

.... 63

Many more experiments along this same line were intended, but
the germination after the second year was so poor that it did not
seem wise to sacrifice the seedbed space for them.

SEED BEDS IN CALIFORNIA

Cold frame (upper left) to show construction with chicken wire laid double
or y2 inch hardware cloth to keep out gophers and moles. Seed bed planted
(upper right) mulched y2 inch sand to prevent hard crust and maintain proper
moisture conditions. Young seedlings (lower left) from seed planted Septem¬
ber 9, 1924, photographed March 25, 1925. The iris in the foreground are old
plants. Three seedbeds (lower right) covered with lattices to aid germination.

[13]

Seeds Planted Before Drying
The seeds were taken from the green pods as soon as harvested
and planted before drying and hardening took place.

No.

Cross

Condition

of seeds

Number

planted

Germi¬

nation

1st

year

1073

Sundew X Sitka .

... Pale

plump

1074

Sundew X Sitka .

< i

1075

Sundew X Sitka .

i <

1076

Sundew X Sitka .

( c

1077

American X Modoc .

( (

1078

Hollywood X Sitka .

( l

1079

Hollywood X Sitka’ .

1 1

1080

Sitka X Nichols’ S-476 .

( (

1081

936A X 87.1 A .

t (

Li ImJ

1082

945B X (trace Sturtevant .

l (

1083

Grace Sturtevant X 859B .

( (

1084

Hollywood X 93 1C .

( (

1085

Hollywood X 875B .

( l

1086

Sundew X Sitka .

( l

1087

Sundew X Holly Madison .

l (

1088

845B X 871 A .

( (

1089

847B X 855 B .

( (

1090

Sitka X Gold Imperial .

( (

1091

875B X 826 A .

( (

1092

888A X 871 A .

t (

1093

93 1C X Grace Sturtevant .

i (

1095

875A X Sitka .

( l

1097

Blue and Gold X Yosemite Falls..

( (

1098

Blue and Gold X 93 8B .

1096

American X Grace Sturtevant .

... nearlv

dry

1101

Hollywood X Sitka .

< i

1104

Sitka X self .

.. fresh

1105

Sitka X 93 1C .

< t

1106

Sitka X 859B .

i (

1107

Pale Moonlight X Holly Madison.

... partly

dry

1110

941A X Yosemite Falls .

< t

1112

875B X Grace 'Sturtevant .

.. fresh

1113

875B X Yosemite Falls .

t (

1115

American X Sitka .

( c

1116

American X Blue and Gold .

t (

1117

American X Modoc .

( t

1118

American X Grace Sturtevant .

( t

Li Li

[14]

Group of young iris seedlings. The seeds were planted September 9, 1923,
the seedlings transplanted May 10, 1924, and the photograph taken August
10, 1924. California Blue came from this particular lot.

[15]

Pre-Cooled at 42° F Before Planting
Dry seeds in refrigeration from September 9 to September 23, 1928

Number of

seeds Germination

No. Cross treated 1929 1939

919 1881 X self . 42 20 3

927 398A X Dominion . 43 7 8

930 398A X 400C . 68 33 10

940 399A X Moa . 39 12 12

Seeds in refrigeration from August 30 to September 20, 1929

Seeds Germination

No. Cross treated in 1930

877 175A X 859B . IT 3

979 175A X 189D . 47 6

980 175 A X 189D . 35 1

981 175A X Primrose . 2 0

982 183B X 859B . 1 0

983 183B X self . 3 0

984 398A X 850A . 33 11

985 399A X 858A . 46 15

986 399A X 858A . 63 31

987 399A X 859A . 44 20

995 175A X 607D . 32 1

996 841A X 189D . 15 8

997 849A X Grace Sturtevant . 30 1

998 849A X 859B . 20 5

999 858A X 859B . 44 10

1000 858A X 189D . 63 17

1001 859A X 399A . 36 18

1102 859B X 183B . 5 4

1003 859B X Sitka . 52 17

1004 859A X 858A . 41 12

1005 859A X Gold Imperial . 3 1

1006 859A X Modoc . 28 11

1007 859A X Modoc . 16 10

1008 859A X Grace Sturtevant . 20 0

1009 860B X Modoc . 35 10

1010 870A X 400A . 17 1

1011 877A X Grace Sturtevant . 47 8

1012 877C X Cold Imperial . 2 0

1013 878A X 850A . 12 2

1014 Ahwahnee X 859A . 15 5

1015 Chalice X Firefall . 6 0

1016 Citronella X Pink Lass . 6 0

[16]

No.

Cross

Seeds

treated

Germination

in 1930

1017

Eldorado X self .

. 5

1018

Gold Imperial X 841B .

. 17

1019

Gold Imperial X Sitka .

. 1

1020

Gold Imperial X Sitka .

. 2

1021

Gold Imperial X 859C .

. 30

1022

Gold Imperial X 189D .

. 2

1023

Gold Imperial X 859B .

. 20

1024

Modoc X 858A .

. 46

1025

Modoc X 859A .

. 50

1027

Modoc X 859A .

. 44

1042

Pink Lass X Rosultra .

. 41

1043

Primrose X 189D .

. 35

1044

Primrose X Easter Morn .

. 1

1045

Purissima X Easter Morn .

. 53

1046

Purissima X 607D .

. 40

1047

Purissima X New Albion .

. 71

1048

Purissima X 189D .

. 53

1049

Purissima X 189D .

. 57

1050

Purissima X 189D .

. 45

1051

Purissima X 189D .

. 1

1052

Sundew X Modoc .

. 46

1053

Sundew X Iris King .

. 2

Due to the poor quality of these seedlings the beds were remade
after one year.

Seeds Knicked

Seed coat cut with knife and seeds planted October 3, 1924

No.

Cross

Number

of seeds

treated

Germination

1925 1926

750

Dalila X

Trosuperba .

. 5

751

Primavera

X Alcazar .

. 10

752

Primavera

X Alcazar .

. 41

This method did not seem promising and was discontinued.

[17]

X-Ray Treatment of Seed Prior to Planting

Treated September 21, 1928. Planted September 24, 1928.
Seeds were dry when treated.

No.

Cross

Number of

seeds

treated

Treatment

Germination

1929 1930

903

Purissima X 79 7 A ....

. 49

5 milliamps

5 minutes

20 K V

924

398A

X Cardinal .

. 59

7 milliamps

10 minutes

40 K V

929

398A

x 400C .

. 53

8 milliamps

15 minutes

60 K Y

947

400C

X Bruno .

. 21

10 milliamps

20 minutes

75 K V

Largest Number of Seeds Per Pod and Germination of Same

Number of Germination

seeds in one

No. Cross in a pod year

398 Alcazar X Gaudichau . 71 17

400 Alcazar X Gaudichau . 86 14

401 Alcazar X Gaudichau . 78 16

403 Alcazar X Gaudichau . 90 14

469 Caterina X Gaudichau . 73 37

582 Lord of June X Sherbert . 71 26

602 Mine. Cheri X Conq. X Parisiana . 71 39

604 Mme. Cheri X Gaudichau . 72 27

606 Mme. Cheri X Gaudichau . 77 31

651 Nancy Orne X L. A. Williamson . 72 20

655 Nancy Orne X Mohr 41 . 83 25

749 Alcazar X Tamerlan . 71 14

1036 Modoc X Grace Sturtevant . 80 4

1037 Modoc X Grace Sturtevant . 70 7

1047 Purissima X New Albion . 71 19

1065 Grace Sturtevant X 938A . 77 40

1145 931A X Polly Madison . 78 69

1185 China Lantern X Eastern Morn . 71 43

1186 China Lantern X W. R. Dykes . 73 50

1221 963B X W. R. Dykes . 75 47

The seeds which were pre-cooled were placed in petri dishes,
kept moist, and left in the refrigerator for 15 days at a tempera¬
ture of 38° Fahrenheit. Several of these lots, planted in Septem¬
ber, 1933, show splendid germination at this writing (May, 1934),
but as a whole they appear to be little or no better than those
handled in the ordinary manner. From all of the evidence at hand
so far none of the above experiments appear to have been of ma¬
terial value in securing either quicker or more complete germina¬
tion of the seeds. Perhaps more striking results may be secured in
the future along similar or entirely different lines. It might be
noted here that some workers have apparently had marked suc¬
cesses with certain methods. Clarence White of Redlands, Cali¬
fornia, informs me that he gets decidedly better germination and
faster growing seedlings by planting the seeds taken fresh from
the pods just as soon as they are in condition to pick.

It should also be noted that seeds germinate from pods which
appear to be far from being fully mature. This has been noted in
several cases where the pods were accidentally knocked off the
stalks when they appeared to be but little more than half mature.
In several cases also the pods were harvested before the ends began
to crack and while the seeds were still green or whitish and before
the brown color began to appear. In all such cases a good germina¬
tion was had.

Transplanting and Care of Seedlings

In California the seedlings should be transplanted in May or
June at which time they have attained considerable size, 6 to 12
inches tall. In order not to unnecessarily disturb the seeds which
have not yet germinated care must be exercised in removing the
young plants from the seedbeds. This is accomplished by first
thoroughly watering them and then inserting the trowel beneath
the roots and lifting the soil sufficiently to loosen the plants,
which can then be pulled up with clean roots, thus leaving the
soil in place. The plants are then set out in well-prepared soil in
rows 1 % to 2 feet apart — the plants 8 to 12 inches apart in the
rows. Obviously more can be expected in the growth and develop¬
ment of the plants if they are given plenty of room, but I have al¬
ways had to crowd my seedlings in order to fit the restricted space
available. I would prefer to have the rows 3 feet apart and the
plants 18 inches distant in the rows in order to allow for plenty
of space when the plants are mature. It is not a good practice to

[19]

transplant very small seedlings 2 to 4 inches in height in the open
ground, because they recover very slowly from the change. It is
far better to allow them to remain in the seedbeds, or other con¬
tainers, until they have attained sufficient growth, after which
they appear to be little inconvenienced by transplanting.

Frequent irrigations and cultivations are necessary in California
to promote the best conditions of growth. Under favorable condi¬
tions seedlings frequently bloom in October, November, and De¬
cember or 14 to 16 months from the time of planting the seeds.
On an average, from 50 per cent to 75 per cent of all seedlings
bloom the following spring, 18 or 20 months from seed, or almost
exactly 2 years from the time the flowers were pollinated. In order
to make room for the more promising ones the undesirable seedlings
are removed and discarded as soon as the first flowers appear. By
this early removal much labor and confusion are avoided. Pollina-

tion of the new and promising hybrids begins with the appearance
of the first blossoms, which makes it necessary to leave the seed
bearing plants in their original positions until the seeds are har¬
vested. They may then be lifted and segregated as clumps ; they
may be divided in the usual manner ; or they may be left undis¬
turbed for another year. The greatest increase usually follows the
latter method for the first year, whilst over a period of two or three
years more and better plants may be produced by dividing and
transplanting as soon as possible.

Dividing and Transplanting Offshoots

Well established plants may be lifted, divided, and transplanted
at almost any season, but most iris growers agree that the best
time is immediately following the blooming period. The production
of seed delays this process and materially affects the increase of
those plants used for breeding purposes. Briefly, the process con¬
sists in digging up the old plants, shaking off the soil, separating
the rhizomes, cutting back the tops, and then setting them out in
properly tilled and fertilized soil. For immediate transplanting the
roots need not be disturbed at all, but should be allowed plenty
of room in the ground. As a matter of fact, the offshoot is set
sufficiently deep to just cover the rhizome and no attempt is made to
accomplish the remarkable feat of allowing the rhizome to rest on
the soil “like a duck on the water.”

The old, spent rhizomes are discarded. The small offshoots or

[20]

eyes may be reset if desired, since they make very good plants in
one year.

The arrangement of irises in a garden is a matter of taste. A
satisfactory method appears to be to plant the different varieties in
groups in regular or irregular beds, and avoid, if possible, rows
and long continuous borders. Thought may be given to the har¬
mony of color and size so that blendings or contrasts be emphasized.
Thus whites, creams, yellows, blends, reds, lavenders, etc., may be
arranged close together, or such sharp contrasts as yellows and the
darkest purples may be placed together to emphasize color quality.
Similarly, small varieties may be set in front of taller ones to give
the proper balance in the garden. As a matter of fact there are
few problems in adapting irises to the garden. Because of their
soft color tones, harmony is produced witty almost any sort of ar¬
rangement of varieties, but it must be also said that much can be
done by judicious selection and combinations should be carefully
studied and practiced by those who seek the best results.

Some Results of Hybridization

So much has been said and written regarding the value of cer¬
tain varieties as seed and pollen parents that it has been thought
wise to tabulate some of the writer’s results of iris breeding in
California. It might be said that seasonal influence on seed pro¬
duction appears to be quite definite, since some years are very
much better than others. The critical time is during pollination,
for after the seed is once set no further difficulties are usually en¬
countered in this area. Some varieties which could not be pollinated
one year set seed well the next with the same kind of pollen. I am
calling attention to this situation, because a variety may produce
seed well in one locality and fail in another.

Only named varieties are included in the table, although of late
years unnamed seedlings have figured excessively in the crosses.

[21]

Pollination and Germination Records, 1923-1933
Only the crosses which set seed are included in this list

Name of variety

Number of

crosses ^

Seeds %

produced «

h-*

Number of 55-

crosses

germinated

Number of

crosses

h— '

Seeds 5

produced 2

parent

«4-l

1 QJ
O 03
.O 03

g 9
P a

germinated

A. E. Kunerd .

. 1

Afterglow .

. 8

203

124

Ahwahnee .

. 2

Albert Victor .

. 6

Alcazar .

. 38

2186

652

559

370

Amabilis .

. 2

Amas .

. 9

597

307

948

325

Ambassadeur .

. 28

660

105

....

American .

. 7

248

142

Anna Farr .

. 2

Archeveqne .

. 3

Argentina .

. 2

482

110

Avalon .

. 6

Balboa .

. 5

252

161

....

Ballerine .

. 2

....

«...

....

Black Prince .

. 4

....

Blue and Gold .

. 2

170

Blue Jay .

. 4

....

Brooklvn .

. 3

....

B. Y. Morrison .

. 2

Bruno .

....

579

155

California Blue .

. 23

977

460

863

294

Caprice .

. 8

102

....

Cardinal .

....

463

188

Caterina .

. 35

1477

590

518

Chalice .

. 5

....

Chelles .

. 9

Chereau .

. 7

China Lantern .

. 3

225

131

159

Citronella .

. 5

Claridad .

«...

....

Conchita .

. 1

Conquistador .

. 6

268

223

1115

565

Coronado .

....

Crepuscule .

4_J

Crinoline .

....

Crusader .

. 8

371

207

182

Dalila .

. 3

Delicatissima .

. 1

....

[ 22 ]

Demi Deuil . , . 7

Dejazet . 1

Diablo .

Dorothy K. Williamson .... 1

Dolly Madison . 3

Dominion . 1

Dorothea . 3

Dr. Bernice . 1

Dream .

Edouard Michel . 2

E. L. Crandall . 6

Eldorado . 23

Esplendido .

Fairy . 12

Firefall . 7

Flame Bearer . 4

Flavescens . 2

Florentina alba . 1

Formosa .

Freida Mohr . 2

Fro . 10

Foster’s Yellow .

fulva . 1

Germanica . 3

Gertrude . 5

Gleam . 1

Gold Crest .

Gold Imperial . 19

Grace Sturtevant . 6

Gypsy Queen . 3

Hector . 2

Her Majesty . 11

Hiawatha . 2

Hollywood . 12

Eoogiana .

Ibmacrantha .

Iris King . 1

Isoline . 11

Ivory Coast . 1

Jacquesiana . 3

Jeanne d’Arc . 6

Juniata .

Kashmir White . 7

Kochii . 6

Lady Foster . 4

Lent A. Williamson . 3

Liberty . 27

....

517

334

460

216

....

310

108

....

101

....

763

315

....

• •••

....

165

114

1,258

444

. .

, .

• .

. •

175

. .

, .

. .

423

158

729

413

121

]

241

265

161

140

131

176

421

161

146

511

216

145

103

324

[ 23

Leichtlini . 20

Lohengrin . . 23

Lord of June . 6

Loreley . 14

Louis Bel .

Loute . 1

Magnifica . 3

Mareschal . 1

Marenco . 1

Marian Mohr . 6

Mary Garden . 2

Mauvine . 13

Medrano .

Menetrier . 5

mesopotamica . 9

Midwest .

Minnehaha . 3

Miss Willmott . 3

Mme. Chereau . 18

Mine. Cheri . 9

Mme. Durrand . 5

Moa .

Modoe . 17

Monsignor . 10

Mother of Pearl .

Mrs. A. Gray . 1

Mrs. Haw . 12

Mrs. H. Darwin . . 7

Mrs. Smith . 2

Mrs. Valerie West .

Mt. Penn . 10

Nancy Orne . 7

New Albion . 4

Nine Wells . 1

Nuee d’Orage . 3

Opera . 1

Oriflamme . 25

Ohwahnee . 1

Othello .

Pacific . 1

Pale Moonlight . 2

Pallida Dalmatica . 7

Parisiana . 13

Pastel Shades .

Pauline . 8

Perfection . 3

Pfauenauge .

Pink Lass . 2

102

181

105

• .

. .

620

164

397

103

100

164

. .

405

658

120

. .

147

326

216

587

196

429

230

173

166

. .

, .

. .

301

129

103

107

355

162

117

. .

. ,

139

676

528

154

. .

752

299

• •

140

• •

100

562

279

324

223

218

104

263

487

819

211

213

341

178

845

120

108

199

Poiteau .

• •

• .

Primavera .

246

Primrose .

Princess Beatrice .

# #

Princess Viktoria Luise .

Prosper Laugier .

. .

• .

Prospero .

Pumila lutescens .

• •

. .

Purissima .

1,014

375

. ,

. #

Quaker Lady .

. .

. ,

Queen Caterina .

Queen of May .

525

Rialgar .

. .

Ricardi Fonce .

Rose Mitchell .

207

Rosultra .

• •

. .

, .

Santa Barbara .

• •

. .

504

177

Shasta .

. .

Shekinah .

Shelford Yellow .

. m

Sherbert .

342

609

312

Sherwin Wright .

Shining Waters .

198

126

Sindjkha .

354

125

198

101

Sitka .

486

249

378

200

So far ana .

Soledad .

Souv. de Mine. Gaudichau..

1,015

455

2,148

911

Sundew .

377

114

• •

Sunset .

201

• •

• s

Sybil .

207

. .

Tamerlan .

679

378

339

Tecumseh .

Tenaya .

Tinea .

Titan .

Trautlieb .

trojana .

Troost .

158

Trosuperba .

475

297

504

Turquois .

• •

Uncle Remus .

124

Windham .

. .

Winneshiek .

. .

• .

W. R. Dykes .

127

767

441

Wyomissing .

Yosemite Falls .

Zannardelli .

[25]

WESTERN SKIES

To properly evaluate the amount of work involved in obtaining
the above crosses it must be borne in mind that often dozens, or
even hundreds, of crosses where made which set no seed at all.
These, of course, are not mentioned. All of the unnamed hybrids,
designated by number only were also omitted in the table, although
many of them were prolific seed producers and were abundantly
used in originating some of the new introductions.

It is believed that the varieties listed in the table are fairly rep¬
resentative and will serve to indicate what might be expected by
the average hybridizer. A great many other varieties were also
tested, but without results. In practically all cases the seeds were
allowed to remain in the seedbeds for two years. Had they been
left longer the number of plants produced would have been con¬
siderably increased.

It will be noted that many of the best seed bearers produced no
pollen and, similarly, certain good pollen parents bore no seeds.
These deficiencies are indicated by dashes in the table.

These results should not be taken as indicative of what may
always occur in California or what may happen in other localities.
Many trials over a period of years may reward the persistent
worker with seeds and plants from what may appear to be hope¬
less combinations in the iris field.

[26]

ROSE MITCHELL

A pink iris of firm substance as well as other desirable qualities of size,

form and vigor.

[27]

The disposal of unnamed seedlings is one of the breeder’s problems. Quanti¬
ties liawe been donated to city paries and other public gardens, but most of them
are composted. A general distribution would greatly injure the legitimate
sale of desirable new introductions and practically eliminate the retail trade

in a community.

Conclusions

It is obvious that one cannot discuss adequately all of the prob¬
lems and delights of iris breeding in a paper of such limited
scope. This will account for the many omissions which will be
apparent to everyone, but which are nevertheless necessary.

In conclusion it might be interesting to know that these years of
iris breeding, undertaken purely as an avocation, resulted in
making 1,400 successful crosses which produced normal appearing
seeds. In all 36,890 seeds were obtained which gave rise to exactly
14,440 seedlings, all of which wrere brought to the flowering condi¬
tion. From this vast array of new creations only 34 hybrids1 were
registered, of which three, American, Painted Minx, and Polar
Light have not been introduced. In view of the rather limited
number of new introductions it seems desirable to list the full
ancestry of these chosen few.

1 The fulva and Dorothy K. Williamson hybrids, of which three were in¬
troduced, are not included in the above.

[28]

Ancestry of Registered Hybrids

American (1930) No. 399 A. Alcazar x Gaudichau.

Blue Gown (1929) No. 23 A. Amas x Conquistador.

California Blue (1929) No. 247A. Oriflamme x Conquistador.

China Lantern (1932) No. 963B. ( Conquistador x L. A. William¬
son) X Cardinal.

Easter Morn (1931) No. 841B. California Blue X ( Argentina x
Conquistador) .

Firefall (1928) No. 226 A. Mrs. Haw x Eldorado.

Flame Bearer (1932) No. 1100. [Hollywood X ( Alcazar x
Gaudichau )] X ( Mme . Cheri x Magnifica).

Hollywood (1929) No. 267A. Sindjkha x Magnifica.

Ivory Coast (1932) No. 904A. Purissima X (Trosuperba x Mohi
40) X Menetrier.

Modoc (1929) No. 400C. Alcazar x Gaudichau.

Mourning Cloak (1933) No. 986B. ( Alcazar x Gaudichau) X
( Uncle Remits x Dominion) .

New Albion (1931) No. 841 A. California Blue X ( Argentina x
Conquistador) .

Pacific (1929) No. 315A. Gaudichau x Lady Foster.

Painted Minx (1930) No. 883A. ( Ambassadeur x Sherbert) X
Cardinal. Not introduced.

Pastel Shades (1931) No. 209D. Minnehaha x Midwest.

Pink Lass (1929) No. 264A. Parisiana x Conquistador.

Polar Light (1929) No. 331A. Trojana x Lady Foster. Not in¬
troduced.

Redglow (1933) No. 948A. Modoc x Bruno.

Rose Mitchell (1929) No. 693B. Sindjkha x Conquistador.

Rosultra (1929) No. 183. Mauvine x Diablo.

Shining Waters (1932) No. 976A. [ (C at erina x Marian Mohr) X
California Blue ] X (Fncle Remus x Moa).

Sierra Blue (1930) No. 561A. Gaudichau x Samta Barbara.

Sitka (1931) No. 885A. (Oriflamme x Conquistador) X Shasta.

Stipples (1928) No. 239 A. Nuee d’ Or age x Opera.

Sundew (1929) No. 409 A. Alcazar x Mme. Cheri.

Tenaya (1932) No. 934A. (Alcazar x Gaudichau) X Cardinal.

Uriah (1933) No. 941A. (Alcazar x Gaudichau) X Mrs. Valerie
West.

Uncle Remus (1928) No. 253F. Oriflamme x Gaudichau.

Western Skies (1929) No. 189 A. Miss Willmott x Sherbert.

[29]

Westlander (1933) No. 894 A. ( California Blue x Louis Bell) X
( Uncle Remus x Moa).

Yosemite Falls (1930) No. 860B. ( Pallida Dalmatica x Ori-

flamme ) X Moa.

In studying these hybrids it will be noted that they are well
scattered numerically. In the list, the number following the name
and date of registration, refers to a particular cross or seed pod and
it is significant that there are only two introductions, New Albion
and Easter Morn, from the same pod. In many cases there were a
number of desirable ones from the same pod and it appears that all
are either good, fair, or poor. I have never found a real outstanding
individual from a litter of poor ones. It is to be noted also, in the
above list, that the more recent introductions have a much more
complicated family tree, a circumstance sure to become more
involved as the work continues. How far one can go without mere
duplication remains to be seen, but it does not seem possible that
all of the interesting combinations have as yet been exhausted.

SOUTHERN NATIVES IN CALIFORNIA
F. F. Williams, M. D., Patton, California

® Ten years ago I became interested in the iris of the southern
states. At that time according to Dykes there were only three spe¬
cies in this group ; namely — 7. hexagona, I. foliosa and 7. fulva. The
same year Dr. Small of the New York Botanical Garden added two
to this number : 7. savannarum and 7. Kimballiae, kindly sending
them to me shortly after. Dr. Small has continued to send me
Louisiana irises and because of his help I have a fairly represen¬
tative number of the irises he has collected.

[30]

M M

J. N. Giridlian

An unidentified white Louisiana iris just coming into bloom

in Dr. William’s garden.

[31]

Many of these I have not continued to grow, either because they
were close to, or, for me at least, inferior to others. These iris ap¬
pear to be particularly adapted to Southern California but they
must have the same accommodations they are used to. I make up
my soil before planting consisting of peat, garden soil and well
rotted barnyard manure, — frequently giving a dressing of pine
mould. When well established I give the plants a feeding of com¬
mercial fertilizer. Although I have never given them bone meal, I
am not convinced that they are adverse to some lime.

In making my beds it is arranged so that the plants can be
flooded easily as they all demand more water than any other garden
iris. However, it has been observed that the reds or reddish sorts
will do well with less moisture than the blues or their albinos.

Oftimes I have had the question raised as to whether there
was not too much foliage in proportion to bloom. Such has not
been my experience although it has been observed that those of
folios a type have a tendency to bear their flowers down in the
foliage. It has therefore, been my principle to stay away from J.
foliosa in all my breeding, even though it does give color that is
hard to duplicate. In breeding I constantly breed back to the
parents as I believe I get better color breaks by so doing.

Of the species I have so far kept savannarum blue and its al¬
bino, elephantina, citricristata alba (?), chrysophoenicia, Thom-
asii , regalis, violipurpurea, fulva with its color variations, pyrrho-
lopha, citriviola, giganticoerulea with its color variations, Albi-
spiritus, miraculosa, vinicolor, fulvaurea, fourchiana and mori-
color. These all have true garden value.

Although the laevigatas are not native species I have found 7.
laevigata colchesterensis and laevigata Regel very desirable as they
bloom at about the same time and require the same treatment.

Concerning the hybrids of the southern natives all of Mr.
Washington’s are decidedly desirable. Dr. Berry’s Cacique and
Sagamore are two of the best. Tulsa, a foliosa-fulva hybrid of
Prof. Essig’s, is rich and interesting. It is of the ecristata type,
having no crest. All set seed readily and crossing is constantly
giving excellent color effects and changes in shape.

[32]

J. N. Giridlian

IRIS LAEVIGATA COLCHESTERENSIS IN DR, WILLIAM’S GARDEN

[33]

TWO CALIFORNIA SPECIES
J. N. Giridlian

Iris Hartwegii australis:

Being neither a writer nor a naturalist, I am unable to write
an article on onr native iris, or tell their history. I am only going
to write a few notes on my personal observations and what I have
read on the subject.

It seems a botanical specimen of a plant was sent to the Kew
herbarium by a Mr. Parish who called the plant Iris Hartwegii
australis in order to differentiate it from the true yellow-flowered
Hartwegii which grows in the northern part of California. Aus¬
tralis is a Latin designation meaning southern. Therefore the
name is appropriate in that it calls this iris the southern form of
I. Hartwegii. However some of the botanists I have talked with
regard this as a distinct species and not merely a color form.

This iris grows on the high mountain ranges of southern Cali¬
fornia. It is plentiful on the San Bernardino mountains above
3,500 feet, and is to be found all along the Rim-of-the- World road
from Crest Line to Big Bear Lake and no doubt extends far be¬
yond these limits in all directions. It is also reported from Mt.
San Jacinto and on the high peaks of the northern part of Ven¬
tura County. They grow along the pine belt in decomposed
granite soil ; invariably the rhizomes are about four inches below
the surface and often covered with six inches of pine needles.
They will even grow in the cracks of rocks. They seem to do
equally well in dense shade or out in the open, but always grow
on a slope. For association they are partial to deciduous ferns
and often the two plants are so interwoven that it is hard to
separate the rhizomes.

In the winter months they are frozen solid and are covered with
a foot or more of snow but with the melting of the snow and the
spring -rains they grow quickly and bloom as the ground begins
to dry out. They bloom in June, those in the lower elevations
starting first and moving upwards at the approximate rate of a
week for each thousand feet of elevation. By the first of August
the seed pods are ripened and the plants themselves begin to die
down because of the terrific heat and the lack of moisture in the
ground.

[34]

J. N. Giridlian

IRIS HARTWEGII AUSTRALIS

[ 3.1 ]

These irises never seem to form colonies as the plants are found
singly and loosely scattered over the hillside. Even the individual
clumps are loosely formed and never seem to have more than a
few fans of leaves. The leaves themselves are very narrow and
lie on the ground so that it is not easy to locate a plant that is
not in bloom.

Iris missouriensis is highly restricted in Southern California.
There are only three known colonies which are separated from
each other by great distances. A small colony is reported from
the vicinity of Fort Cajon. Another stand is to be found on
the shore of Lake Cuyamaca in San Diego County. The largest
colony consisting of about 60 acres is found on the shore of Big
Bear Lake in the San Bernardino mountains. Unlike I. Hartwegii
australis, I. missouriensis forms solid stands. So densely do they

j" -«r'

grow that it is difficult for any other plants to get a foot hold.
Their only companion seems to be the pretty little Lewisia brachy-
calyx which hides its beautiful satiny white flowers under the
iris leaves. They grow in heavy, black adobe soil where the wa¬
ter from the melting snow seeps through the ground and makes
its way to the lake. Here the iris has its roots right in the water
until after the blooming season after which the ground is dried
and baked solid. In its choice of habitat it seems to be identical
with the Louisiana species, the only difference is the matter of
elevation and winter temperature. They bloom the latter part of
June and the flower stalks vary in height from one to three feet
according to the supply of water. On the edge of the colony
where water is not abundant the plants will grow but will not
bloom. The color of the flower is creamy white with varying
amounts of violet veining and a yellow signal blotch around the
crest. I have never been able to locate either a pure white or a
pure violet form.

J. N. Giridlian

IRIS MISSOURIENSIS

[37]

ADVENTURES WITH THE DWARFS
Lena M. Lothrop

■ The little irises appealed to me even in my early “iris ex¬
perience.” I decided to grow and breed them. In vision (and in
ignorance), I saw miniature San Gabriel’s, Mad. Durrand’s,
Rialgar’s and Purissima’s coming from California pollenated
seed ! I confided this dream to a friend who had greater seniority
in iris growing than I. He asked kindly, “Do you think they
grow well here ? ’ ’

The simple question cooled my enthusiasm so that the months
went round the clock with nothing being done about dwarfs, but
with the return of spring my desire to grow the little flowers be¬
came determination. An order for roots was dispatched with the
request for an early delivery as I had already learned what
California sun does to newly planted iris roots while he is main¬
taining temperatures well above 100. However the plants did not
arrive until in July and in spite of my best care were soon over¬
come by the heat. The order was replaced by the dealer only to
be wiped out a second time by an over-zealous yard helper with
his rake in quest of stray leaves. Some rescues .were made from
the compost heap and some stakes but their true identities were
not known. The next order, sent in January to a firm promis¬
ing immediate delivery had not arrived by the end of a hot
April so the order was cancelled and refund requested. There has
been no refund. Such obstacles seemed to make the dwarfs even
more desirable. Through friends, through exchanges, and by
purchase they have come till now the weeding-out point has
arrived.

Seedlings have been raised. No baby San Gabriel’s or Rialgar’s
have appeared among them but it has been interesting to note that
all dozens of Curiosity x Orange Queen are, contrary to my pet
theory of maternity determining height, quite dwarf. It is in¬
teresting to note that Sonny and Marocain, of fine quality them¬
selves, produce fine seedlings, that Mireille, with its odd shaped
petals has reproduced those petals in caricature with but one
exception. Nothing can be more absorbing than to try to probe
their innermost secrets; “Is your father really Lurida, he who
is supposed to have never fathered young, or was it a bee?”

[38]

The rounds are made each morning with note-book, rule and
trowel. I feel of their stems to learn if a second bud is there.
Exasperated I watch them with Victorian false modesty tuck un¬
der their falls. After too hasty action I learned that this is
sometimes caused by adolescent shyness so now the trowel is
withheld until the second day. I prostrate myself to reach
their fragrance and wish Mr. Gersdorff were here to do it tor
me, for after all, is it “spice,7’ or “grapes” or maybe only “new
mown hay”? The morning when they first bloom they are given
a little stake with a number on it, if they fade that same day the
stake is taken away and they are given the air.

It is by experience that we learn. No variegates have been
produced by crossing purple and yellow, no amoenas by com¬
bining purple and white. Some blends have bloomed and I am
hoping to see “pinks” next year but to get real breaks in color
it seems necessary to introduce the blood of other species. This
has been done by Mrs. Dean, Mr. Williamson, Mr. White and Mr.
Sass in producing some of the dwarfs I will describe.

Tall or dwarf, all iris flowers should be in proportion to the
height of their stem, and stems of dwarfs as well as the tall
bearded may be stiff and ugly or slender and graceful.

Of the blue-purple dwarfs Niobe is one of the best because of
its dependability. It is a most profuse bloomer and makes sev¬
eral appearances during the year. Another in the same class is
Ultra. It bloomed in December, in January and again the latter
part of February. Both of these irises are of the larger type of
dwarfs and both lack the fine silky texture that belongs to many
of the true dwarfs. Ultra has horizontal falls, an admirable char¬
acteristic that is rare among these small irises though I cannot
imagine why they were made any other way. Cyanea, a blue-
purple, has the fineness of finish and texture which we like to see
in any iris but the stems are so short that the flowers rest on
and cover the foliage. It is a good bedding iris. The most effec¬
tive use of dwarfs that I have seen was in a Pasadena garden
where they were planted in beds in the lawn. Many people
stopped their automobiles to inquire what they were.

I had thought to discard some of the red-purples this year
but each and every one produced a good reason for remaining.
Marocain is the best dark dwarf in my garden. The deep rich
color extends up into the haft and the stems are slender and
graceful. The petals are broad and well shaped and are content

to stay where they belong, neither stretching, nor twisting, nor
tucking themselves under. Mireille is carelessly formed, has a
sprawling beard but the color is bright and clear and it possesses
an elusive charm. Black Midget has been, in years past, a
cunning little globular flower on a knitting-needle stem but last
month I was shocked to see the great-wide-open spaces between
all its petals. Its sentence is suspended until next spring. When
GtRAminea bloomed I thought it was just “another red-purple”
but I had to admit that the flowers were nicely formed, that the
color was good and the stems slender, and, after a long blooming
period, decided there was every reason for keeping it. Jean Siret
has exceedingly fine texture but it is not much of an iris. It is
sure of its bed and board for the present because of its reputa¬
tion for everblooming. Ditton Purple bloomed while I was away
and Puck is an adorable little ball of a flower with a golden
beard.

The color of Judy reminds me of the color of Edouard Michel
and the throat of Judy reminds me of the throat of Kochii. It
is a rich and unusual color among dwarfs. Its stiff, narrow, white
beard forms an attractive accent. The flowers lasted three days.

Wigan is a nice bronzy red-purple with yellow hafts and dark
dull, gold beards. These bronzed flowers I class as dark blends.
Verdun, Sfax, and Lurida are of this type. Verdun is a rich,
velvety brownish-red-purple. The upper part of the falls and
hafts are bright gold but Verdun has an obnoxious trick of tuck¬
ing its falls sharply under. Kind treatment and persuasion have
no effect on them. The description of Verdun would very nearly
fit Sfax but they are not alike. The standards of Sfax stand up¬
right and the falls are blackish-recl-purple. The falls do reflex
but not outrageously. The upper part of the fall is gold and there
is a trim narrow beard of gold. Lurida has individual charm. In
form it is different from other irises. The petals are narrow and
the falls are held horizontally. The texture of its silky standards
and velvety falls is of the finest. In color it is browner than any
dwarf in my collection. It blooms late in spring and again in
the fall.

White dwarfs are chary of their bloom for me. The Bride and
John Foster have made little return for their board and lodging.
A little pigment seems to make considerable difference for
Lutescens Statellae bloomed itself to death.

The best yellows in my collection are Orange Queen and

[40]

Sonny. Orange Queen is really too large for its height but to be
without it is unthinkable. Sonny is ideal. It is richer, in better
proportion, and has better substance than Harbor Lights, or for
that matter, any yellow that I know.

I am discarding the blue Alpin because of its thin substance
and narrow, twisting petals. Lobelia could go also as it is not
distinct in any way. Ylo, Mandarin and Ciiameiris aurea will
be '‘let out” on account of their inability to endure our blazing
sun. Max departed without my consent. I think it would have
been a good bedding iris.

There may not be “ugly irises” but certainly there are irises
without charm and among them are three dwarfs which are be¬
ing discarded for that reason. Rose Mist has coarse texture, re¬
flexing falls and scanty beard. The white from the haft extends
far out on the blade and it is heavily veined brownish purple,
and this on a “pink” iris! Commandant Driant with his long,
twisting, trailing falls will accompany Rose. His standards are
wide enough but they also writhe. I suppose he was introduced
because of his pale resemblance to a variegata. Another dwarf
which evidently “got by” on color alone is Nyx. It is one of the
taller dwarfs growing 18-20 inches tall. The stem is a straight
heavy stick. There are side blooms but no branches so the flowers
open crushed close to the main stalk. The flowers are quite like
Crimson King and are rich when they first open, however they
soon fade and the falls “pinch” and become “stringy.”

There are two thin textured irises I could not garden without.
One is Glee. It is almost transparent, like a bit of sunlight. The
nicely formed flowers are so tiny, and the stems so slender, that
in shape it is my ideal of a perfect dwarf. The other, Azurea, I
never have enough of. It is fleeting as a fairy — there is scarcely
anything but a memory of bits of sky clustered on earth.

Reflection, by which I suppose Mr. Burchfield meant re¬
flection of the sky, is more satisfying and larger than Azurea —
not so tantalizing. It is a good bedding iris having its foliage
well covered with flowers. Compacta is a lovely blue dwarf.
In color tone it is between the light blues and the deeper blue-
purples. It is the only dwarf I have seen in that color. The
form is compact as its name indicates, with broad petals nicely
placed and firmly held. The lovely color is smoothly laid over
the flower and up into the haft. Erne has nice form and is
quite attractive. It comes in light tannish tones with flecked

[41]

falls. Autumn Elf, a new dwarf, was planted late last fall bnt
it gave me one stem of lovely flowers. The standards are white
and the falls are light violet. I suppose ultimately we will have
ever-blooming irises (though God save the day!) and this dainty
iris is supposed to be a step in that direction.

The least of all these lesser irises that have bloomed in my
garden is the species arenaria. One needs to be on the look-out
or it will not be seen for one day there is a tiny yellow bud, the
next a minature golden iris and the third day, alas, nothing! I
learned too late that it needs sun, — sun and sand.

Some vears ago Mr. Milliken had beds of irises bordered by
broad bands of blue-purple regelia hybrids of Mrs. Deans’
raising. They were not being sold but some of them found their
way into my garden where they have given much pleasure.
They are vigorous, multiply well and bloom profusely. They
are dark with a touch of bronze on the haft and some of them
wear a band of mourning down the center of the fall. Among
these plants came another hybrid which when it bloomed
brought me to my knees for it was a blotched little mongrel —
for all the world like a fluffy mongrel kitten that needed to be
caressed.

Dr. Berry obtained some of the Williamson regelia hybrids.
I saw them in bloom and coveted No. 9. He had scruples about
letting them out of his garden so it seemed very unlikely that I
would ever have No. 9. I wanted it very much. Then one
morning early the telephone rang. It was Dr. Berry at the San
Bernardino railroad depot. He had just gotten in from the
East and it would be some time before he could go on by trolley
to Redlands. Was I up? I was. Had he had his breakfast?
He had not. So I brought him home and he sat on the high
stool in the kitchen while I prepared breakfast. Then I took
him to Redlands, and his scruples took a temporary leave of
absence, so that when I returned a tiny root of No. 9 came
with me. For three years now I have tended it and nursed and
fed it on wood ashes and blood-meal. Once the yard man
snatched off its few leaves so I built a fence of stakes about it
and then surrounded that with a wall of stones. The long-
looked-for bloom appeared this spring — its enchantment has
vanished— I must have been bewitched.

Two dashes of bright blue in Mr. White’s garden arrested
me. On consulting labels I found Blue Topaz (I had never

[42]

seen a blue topaz before) and Balroudour. Blue Topaz has
narrow petals with flaring falls and two flowers to each eight-
inch stem. The form becomes ragged soon but the color, Pale
Violet veined Bluish Violet is unusual. Balroudour has better
form and is more attractive. The standards are blue-grav, but
the rib of the standards is Amparo Blue which is a real blue.
The crests are pale green and there is green on the blade of
the fall. Minute veins of blue-green cover the falls. It is a
delightful medley of delicate blues and greens.

Among the seedlings at Whitehill bloomed a pogo-cyclus hy¬
brid with dwarf pogon form. The red-plum petals were broad,
the flaring falls very velvety and the standards with cockled
surface had a metallic sheen. The vigorous clump was full of
rich and lovely flowers. It is still under number, 4-B-7.

This is the second year for a pair of Mr. White’s Charon
hybrids. One of them which he calls Brindle Pup makes us
laugh, it is such a gay, boldly marked little fellow. The other
seedling, No. 2-B-2, is exquisite beyond words ! The rounded
petals are plain and unruffled. The standards are conic and
the falls flare. The ground color is frosted Water Green with a
tinting of pale yellow. The minute veining of the standards
is visible only by reason of a difference in the texture of the
veins. The veins on the falls are light violet. They come out
from the center of the haft framing the narrow, clipped yel¬
low beard then radiate over the fall like delicate sea fern.

TJrmiensis , the small yellow oncocyclus, by Bonita , a small
yellow pogon, amazingly brought forth three charming lig'ht
blue dwarfs. l-B-14 is in shades of Wistaria Blue, but the rib
of the standards is green and the flaring falls bear a character¬
istic oncocyclus signal patch of violet at the end of the yellow
beard. My eye could not have enough of looking at them. An¬
other lovely dwarf was Flora X Aphrodite, l-C-16, which
shows quite decidedly the pogon influence but the broad petals
have the lustrous sheen of the oncocyclus. The slender thirteen
inch steam had two branches. The standards are pinkish violet
and the deeper falls bear the dark violet signal patch. These
patches of deep color at the end of the beard are very de
corative.

There are no lovelier dwarfs than our own California species.
Bracteata, in varnished golden yellow with bold veins of purple
is a striking and beautiful iris but it is not a good sport — it

[43]

gives up too readily. Douglasiana and Purdyi multiply and
bloom profusely year after year if given a place to their liking
and left undisturbed. Douglasiana comes in a variety of shades
and markings and as they grow so readily from seed one can
discard those less desirable. Purdyi is distinct from Doug¬
lasiana; the most unobserving would recognize the difference
even in the foliage. Purdyi is supposed to be yellow but from
seed purchased of Mr. Purdy all my flowers are glossy white
flushed over the falls with rosy lavender. It has brought me
more blue ribbons than any iris in the garden. I am convinced
that tenax should be planted where it is to bloom, though I
have bloomed it once from a transplanted plant. Macrosiphon
shows some of its dainty yellow flowers each year but it does
not bloom with the abandon of other of the species. The slopes
of our own San Bernardino mountains are covered with lovely
little irises in delicate shades of lavender and albinos are oc¬
casionally found. So far as I know this iris has never been
through a botanist’s hands. Someone has said Hartwegii but
that is a northern yellow species and this San Bernardino iris
is never yellow. Here’s hoping our beautiful iris is not con¬
demned to bear that name.

Many of the dwarfs have a trick of surprising us with a
bloom now and again through the year. At the present time
while we are suffering from an iris over-dose we may not ap¬
preciate that trait but later on these unexpected flowers will
give us much joy.

AT WHITEHILL
C. G. White

■ The iris season has been happily marked by a flood of yel¬
low seedlings many of fine quality and new tones. I have a tall
yellow, lemon chrome, practically a self. This color is the
limit of bright yellow in Ridgeway. Modern yellow parentage
has shown a dominance when matched with dark irises.

[44]

Field Studios

“This is a surprising picture of a not-too-good pogooyclus, but slioivs what

may be an expectation.” — C. G. W.

[45]

I if
'■ ' ;< , J-5&& '

filpti; . M ■

:&%>& «|ik» v ' M

Up < if

I |jj|

■ — ' .

' /• ;;.

S^lKlllSiSiiliS®# pe? ” :

a|;: :; -

■agil

%as$3sKW*3«g »\ •'■< ■. v >
111

■■■

■HPEnf

V:0

‘

• V

i»¥ .

'« ' * ?

'■

WBSm

■;

■ \ .‘••-•v-..- ■;

■>

rn r - • i :

i . ' . !

■v- '• ; - "

?i - • ’ "" _

“Yellow M”

on Persephone,
color of the

The influence of “Yellow
hack ground of its seedlings.

M”

shows in the

[46J

“ Yellow M” on Cliaron, The background is a pale opaque yellow ; the veins

are a deep rose red.

[47]

An encouraging number of pogo-cyclus seedlings have bloom¬
ed, some decidedly charming and interesting. One a Lady Para¬
mount on Hebe, lias the loveliest blended dark falls.

In general, especially in the old clumps, there has been a
prevalence of crooked stems, too short stalks and blooms that
are below par. These faults are perhaps due to a month of
summer in the lap of early spring, following no usual winter
weather.

The main drive of my iris breeding is to transform oncocy-
clus characteristics into hardiness. This must be done or much
of delight and charm will be completely barred from the iris
garden. Outside of Wm. Mohr and perhaps Zwannenburg the
achievements in this field strike me as negligible. The possibili¬
ties are marvelous. Think for example what the transfer of the
tip of the falls in paradoxa to a grand pogon would look like :
or a susiana with a warm background such as already exists in
a susiana X hauronensis cross! And the potentialities in broad
hafts and rounded falls are desirable.

There is a statement attributed to Stonewall Jackson, that
the art of war is to get there firstest with the mostest men. Some¬
thing like that principle applies to pollenization in my experi¬
ence. I use a camel’s hair brush to work the pollen all over and
into the surface of the lip of the stigma.

In our dry air pollen spoils quickly but removed from the
anthers and capsuled it is good for a month or six weeks, an
important consideration. Lady Collet taught me that trick.

Persistency and multiplicity are fundamental in making diffi¬
cult crosses. My one Mm. Mohr seedling was the culmination
of pollenizing five hundred blooms. My seedling was the first
produced, but there are three blooming in California this sea¬
son. Heretofore Wm. Mohr has been completely sterile. (Mr.
White tells me that Wm. Mohr seems to be setting seed in a
number of places this season. Who can account for that? — Ed.)

A number of claims have been made recently that the iris
does best under a rotation of ground. My pogoniris ground
is generally rotated two years out of four. It is a two-year
rotation for the purpose of avoiding the marked second year
slump that occurs in seedlings when moved after their first

[48]

“Yellow M“ on Susiana. This iris shows clearly the fdbric-Uke texture of
the falls. This characteristic is also noticeable in “Yellow M’’ on Persephone

and Mohr son.

[49]

season. At these times it is heavily fertilized and supplied with
humus.

Prof. Essig grows iris of amazing vigor year after year on
the same spot. He manures extensively between plantings.
Mine are no better grown.

Generally I plant under overhead slats to defeat the effect
of fierce suns.

The oncocyclus and regelia groups are put on fallowed
ground yearly. They are maintained in growing vigor with the

utmost difficulty. There is a marked increase of disease on

replanted ground.

The thriftiest Susianas I have seen are in the garden of

F. C. Reibold. Mrs. Reibold tells me she soaked the rhizomes
in strong permanganate of potash solution for thirty minutes
before planting out.

Oncocyclus iris are generally dug and stored every summer.
Strong heat with moisture is a bad combination for them,

though water and heat are all right separately.

My hunch has always been to plant iris seeds in early sum¬
mer. Four years ago, in the push to get away from Redlands
early, some pods showing only a suggestion of split were
opened and the almost white seeds planted. They germinated in
September, a month or two ahead of the thoroughly ripened
brown seeds planted at the same time. Since then this very
early planting is a common practice. An English gardener has
recently advocated this same procedure in an article in Gar¬
den Illustrated.

My seeds are treated with semesan, potted, and the pot
nested in another, to aid drainage, prevent rapid drying and
moderate the changes in pot temperature.

The Boyce-Thompson Institute has demonstrated that many
difficult seeds can be easily sprouted in an electric refrigerator
if packed in damp moss.

Dr. Berry has had seeds of stolonifera lying in the ground
over eight years unsprouted and unrotted, so I tried seeds of
that variety. A good number germinated in the refrigerator
in three months.

In the Whitehill garden, a red label is a discard signal, a
yellow expresses doubt and a white approval.

[50]

In spite of the fact that no iris is judged in the glamorous
light of dawn or of sun-setting (when all iris are lovely) these
labels are often changed, some several times.

Early acquaintance judgments have therefore no standing
whatever. So I most heartily approve in the increase of time
given in the award of the Dykes Medal. At the same time it is
possible to have a certain sympathy for the iris broker who
wants the award as a hall-mark of a new product at the time it
would do him the most good commercially.

This ritual of iris judgment by arithmetical points makes
me wonder which is the most important, the iris or the score
card.

The Rose Society ran into this very matter of points* versus
desirability at a recent show in the Northwest. For the third
time running the sweepstakes was awarded a certain rose. At
the last judgment not one of the three judges officiating con¬
sidered it worthy of a place in their own gardens. The only
way to fully express an honest opinion of such a situation is by
profanity — long and deep !

I know a horseman who for many years has had the selec¬
tion of judges for very successful horse shows in his locality.
He takes the ground that there are many opinions about horse¬
flesh in the Hunter class, and he so varies the judges that any
owner of a good horse may sometime find a judge who thinks
as he does about conformation, and will give his mount a blue
ribbon. If judges had been selected of a set way of thinking
a few experts would perhaps have profited at the expense of a
general live interest and pride in horses.

I think I see a steady narrowing and hardening of opinion
among iris leaders of what constitutes a good iris, especially
in the matter of form. The time may not be so distant when
the iris in the garden will be as conventionalized as it is in
heraldry.

Man’s approach to beauty is various. I believe earnestly that
the best good of the Iris Society, and the best development
of varying charm and interest can only come by giving the
judges full individual liberty of choice,— they should, of course,
not be ignorant of iris. Why all this worship of technicality in
a cult of beauty !

[51]

The value of individual iris is certainly a sectional matter.
In Boulder, Colorado, and in Salt Lake City, Wm. Mohr not
uncommonly grows thirty-inch stalks. With me as high as
twenty inches is rare indeed. In some sections it does not
thrive at all. Wm. Mohr is a very mild example of this truth.
Three well known and well informed irisians from distant lo¬
calities visited California this season. They found a number of
varieties so different from those grown in their own places as to
be unrecognizable here. The differences between their own
localities were less marked but very real.

The iris interest, however, stretches far north, way south
and furtherest west. It is this wide interest that the national
society has to foster, not the choice of certain iris for them all,
nor a mold of thinking.

Note: There is a very vivid illustration of what location does to iris in a
comparison of varieties in Dr. Williams’ mountain and valley gardens. In the
mountains, thirty minutes’ ride away, at an elevation of nearly a mile, Lent
A. Williamson, Morning Splendor, Tropic iSeas, Julia Marlowe, Argynnis,
Dolly Madison and Rialgar are so supremely more glorious than the same sorts
in the valley that I was unable to recognize them. Any judgment of a variety
at one place would be of no value whatever for the other garden. Likewise
a rating in each place averaged, could only be a rank injustice or an over
appraisal. — Lena Lothrop, Associate Editor.

[52]

CHULA VISTA GOES IRIS MINDED
Commander John A. Monroe, U. S. Navy, Retired

■ Chula Vista, California, is a residential-agricultural city of
5,000 population, situated on the shore of San Diego Bay, nine
miles south of San Diego and six miles from the international
line. Lemons and celery are its principal crops. Iris is one of
its claims to fame. It came about thusly:

At the 1931 Chula Vista Community Flower Show, the au¬
thor of this article discussed with Mrs. C. W. Darling, Chair¬
man of the Flower Show Committee, the advisability of estab¬
lishing a classified Iris Section. Mrs. Darling, by the way, has
been in charge of our Flower Show since its beginning, thir¬
teen years ago, and has made it one of the outstanding shows
in this section of many shows. This action was suggested by
the fact that specimen stalks, collections and artistic displays
were all competing together in one class, “Best Display of
Iris.” This was common to all our Flower Shows except San
Diego, which had a classified Iris Section. I immediately
found myself “Chairman of Iris” for the 1932 show. A
week earlier at the San Diego Flower Show, Mrs. Paul V.
Tuttle, Iris Chairman of that show, Mr. C. S. Milliken and
Dr. S. S. Berry who had large displays, all had given me
lavishly of their time, so that I had some inkling of the possi¬
bilities of iris and had learned that there was a national
organization of iris lovers.

A meeting of those who had exhibited at the Chula Vista
Flower Show was called. Seven attended. The Chula Vista
Iris Club was organized. It was decided to put Chula Vista
on the iris map. A show scheduled following that recommended
by the American Iris Society was adopted ; flower containers
for trophies were purchased.

Since the proposed schedule included in its 36 classes, 14
specimen stalk classes for bearded iris as well as 8 for beardless
and 4 for bulbous irises and also the irises in vogue in the
neighborhood were of the vintage of Juniata, Fairy, Aunt
Rachel and Queen of the May, it was decided to obtain some
of the more modern irises. Then ensued much poring over the

[53]

iris catalogues and tlie A. I. S. rating list and bulletins in an
endeavor to select two collections each of which would fill the
classes that we had adopted and which would contain the best
varieties we could afford to buy. Two collections of nearly
equal list value were arrived at and in order to get the best
possible price, they were to be ordered in triplicate, thus mak¬
ing a total of six collections to be purchased by six of our
members. The list was sent to several California dealers and
was purchased from the lowest bidder. Each member paid the
actual cost of the collection which he or she received. Later
on, as the irises have made increase, members have exchanged
with each other and with folks in the nearby towns.

The original list follows, with those that have done well
starred :

**Purissima
^Kashmir White
Theseus

#San Francisco
*True Delight
#True Charm
#*Mildred Presby
* Rhein Nixe
**San Gabriel
*#Don Quixote
i#Mme. Durrand
Candlelight
Valencia
Valkyrie

L. A. Williamson
Ambassadeur
##Bonita

Avalon
Wm. Mohr
*#Pacific
** Santa Barbara
*Souv. de L. Michaud
^Princess Beatrice
#E1 Capitan
Wedgewood
Ideal

Gold Imperial
George Yelcl
#Citronella
King Karl
Jubilee
** Emperor
*#Snow Queen
**Aurea

#Souv. de Mme.
Gaudichau
Sir Michael
^Pioneer
Moa

Cardinal

##Rosado.

** Frieda Mohr
Dolly Madison
^Coronado
**Monspur
**Louisiana white iris
**fulva
japonic a
tectorum
cristata

In 1932 the first show was held under the new schedule with
36 classes. Mr. C. S. Milliken of Pasadena, California, judged
this show. Although the new varieties were then only one year
plants, quite a number of fine stalks were shown and the dis¬
play attracted considerable interest and favorable comment. Club
members also showed at the San Diego Flower Show with good
success.

Our 1933 show was the first to be held in co-operation with
the American Iris Society. Mrs. Lena M. Lotlirop of San Berna-

[54]

Japanese iris, Kombarin, in the garden of Commander Monroe, 15 months after
planting with 30 stalks, 39 inches tall and flowers 7 inches in diameter.

[55]

dino, California, judged this show. The classes were well filled
with fine quality blooms. In view of the A. I. S. rule allowing but
one award per class per exhibitor, entry was limited to one per
class per garden. This works fine in a season when there is
plenty of bloom at show time, especially if show space is limited as
with us, but not so good in a year like this (1934) when bloom is
sparse and the show is held two weeks before the midseason peak.
Our club members again in 1933 showed at the San Diego Flower
Show which hit us at our peak and they did very well indeed.

More varieties of irises have been acquired each year since the
original lot, by exchange, gift and purchase, until there are
approximately 180 varieties of bearded iris and 60 varieties of
beardless iris, mostly modern, being grown in the gardens of Chula
Vista.

As soon as newly acquired irises demonstrate their satisfactory
performance, exchanging begins. Since the original purchase,
those members who have desired to buy new varieties have com¬
bined their lists and submitted the combined lists to dealers, pur¬
chase being made from the lowest bidder. Each pays for what he
gets, less discount. The criterion for judging the performance of an
iris under our conditions includes ability to make height of stalk
as given in catalogue, resistance to fungous diseases and thrips,
rapidity of increase, ability to take hold quickly so that it may
give a number of bloom stalks the first year after planting — stalks
of nearly normal height. We try to get our planting done before
July 1st in order to take advantage of our long growing season.
In good iris years some varieties will give as many as eight or ten
bloom stalks the next spring after planting. Some of the later
acquisitions that have made good are : Canyon Mists, Indian
Chief, Jacinto, Los Angeles, Rosa Bonheur, and San Diego ; all
the varieties of beardless irises.

This list would have been longer but we have had a poor season
for bearded iris, both as regards stem and freedom of bloom, so
that many promising varieties are still on the uncertain list.

Before this year, the Club meetings were held whenever there
was business to be transacted although usually considerable in¬
formal discussion of iris subjects followed the completion of the
business. This year, we are planning to have quarterly meetings
with a speaker at each meeting. So far there have been no regular
dues, a collection being made to settle expenss such as trophies.

[56]

Interest in iris is growing locally and in nearby towns. Our
club now has twelve members, another flower show has a classi¬
fied iris section this year and one has expressed its intention of
doing so next year.

The outstanding feature of this enterprise has been the hearty
co-operation that our club has received from our show manage¬
ment, from the San Diego County press and from all the A. I. S.
members with whom we have been in touch.

IRISES IN THE GARDEN
Sydney B. Mitchell

■ The problems of an iris grower are many, and if he is a
breeder as well, they are increased. Doubtless for the seedling
grower the best plan is a nice new piece of ground each year
where he can grow in rows the results of his hybridizing. If
that is not possible, then an area large enough so that he can let
half of it lie fallow after each crop of seedlings and then give
the part to be used a good spread of farmyard fertilizer, well
dug in, is next best. The seedling patch is a nuisance in the
garden proper not only because it is in a constant state of change,
but because irises look better in patches of many flowers of the
same variety than in a medley of a thousand spikes each differing
in color, shade, height or garden effect.

So I shall consider only the growing of irises in the garden, and
mainly the tail bearded ones which are the most effective members
of the family. Here the very first question which arises is
whether segregation or dispersal is better, whether we shall have
an iris garden or use our irises as incidents or accents in a mixed
flower border. My own plantings have been so numerous, so large,
and so varied in their conditions that I have tried all plans, and
in my present garden I am attempting a combination.

Certainly in many gardens the simplest way is to provide an
area — in a deep, narrow city lot at the rear, or in a broader,
larger garden some section not too near the house — that can be
given up altogether or almost so to this flower alone. Under
either conditions there are some advantages in screening off the
iris garden, not merely to provide an element of surprise on first
seeing it, but because the monotonous foliage, once flowering is

[57]

over, is hardly wliat you want to have always before you. If there
is hesitation in absolutely devoting the space to irises, a possible
compromise and, like most compromises, not wholly desirable, is
to combine them with some other flowers which bloom at different
seasons. If the iris planting is new and there are good spaces
between the clumps, one might interplant with some of the
stronger growing, taller, cheaper varieties of gladiolus. These,
having similar foliage to irises, fit in Avell, but once the irises be¬
gin to crowd the space, or even before that when they are well
established, they give the gladiolus a hard run for food. Under
my own conditions where daffodils flower mainly in March and
irises in May, they might well be grown in the same border or
area, for both get along nicely without summer water. But if
the irises are to be followed by a later interplanted flower, either
an annual or perennial, care must be taken to select only such
as grow upright and are sparse in the foliage at the base, so that
light and sunshine may always reach the iris rhizomes, a consider¬
ation which at once eliminates petunias and other spreaders
and suggests snapdragons and larkspurs, among the annuals,
and asters among perennials. Where the perennial asters or
Michaelmas daisies flourish, as in England or many parts of east¬
ern America or the north Pacific coast, one might follow the ar¬
rangement of a double iris border not long since described and
illustrated in an English magazine, where the irises made a
gorgeous show in June and the interplanted asters were equally
effective in September and October. This particular perennial
is suitable because to do its best the Michaelmas daisy needs
yearly separation and replanting in spring, and this would allow
of the necessary thinning out and fertilizing where two crops are
grown together. Of course it is also possible to combine irises
with some shrub background, such as lilacs, and to so edge the
paths in the garden with dwarf annuals or with such border
perennials as pinks, Alyssum saxatile, Nepeta mussini, or the
common sun roses or helianthemums as to take away the curse of
the rigid margins where irises come right to the walks. I have
said nothing of planting irises in formal gardens because they
have always seemed to me singularly ill adapted to such situa¬
tions, particularly as this is apt to bring them too close to the
house. Another place I don’t like to see irises planted is in nar¬
row rows edging walks, where they always seem thin and in¬
effective in bloom and pretty stiff when out of it.

[58]

On the other hand, if employed merely as materials in a
herbaceous border, the best use of irises seems to me to be as
accents repeated at regular distances to tie the composition to¬
gether. Here the important considerations are the relations of
their colors to adjacent plants and to the background. They will
be best placed where they repeat the color of nearby flowers of
different growth and form, or where they pick up a suggestion
and carry it on, a clump of a good lavender blue iris near
Aquilegia coerulea, the blue and white Colorado columbine ; a
rich mauve purple in front of the tall meadow rue, Thalictrum
dipt ero car pum, or a yellow iris picking up the color of a yellow
bedding viola below it. Obviously here it is equally important
to avoid the clashes between irises and other plants, such as
getting a so-called red iris near a red oriental poppy, or a pink
iris near a salmon poppy. May I here interject my last experi¬
ment with the bulbous Dutch irises in a new herbaceous border.
These were planted in clumps of twenty-five bulbs of each variety
at intervals of twenty feet or so apart. Because of their rather
short flowering time they were interpl anted with tulips. Had
both flowered at different times they would have given two flow¬
ering periods in each space, but as it happened this season they
flowefed together and we got some pleasing effects from white
tulips (Carrara) and white irises together and also from yellow
tulips (Inglescombe Yellow) with yellow irises, also from tulip
Dido (salmon rose) with blue irises and the stronger contrast of
Pride of Harlem tulips and a still bluer iris.

Possibly a very few iris growers who are also general garden¬
ers may be interested in my solution of my own problem of a
large iris garden on a hillside which normally gets no rain from
June to October. My collection of named varieties and selected seed-
lings extends in a band from twenty-five to forty feet wide, a
band the margins of which are irregularly waved. Down the
hill below them extends a border of evergreen shrubs which when
more fully developed will give a pleasant and permanent back¬
ground. Some twenty or twenty-five feet above the iris band up
the hill is a border of perennials, shrubs and annuals, margined
by a path below the house and near enough to be kept watered
and cultivated all summer. The main iris border consists of
large irregular groups, sometimes the development of as many as
fifty separate plants of a variety, sometimes fewer, depending on
their garden effectiveness or the number of rhizomes available.

Below this band and on into the evergreen shrubbery some of the
less attractive irises extend, while above in the herbaceous border
facing the upper path are smaller clumps of the newer varieties,
fine selected seedlings on trial and a few smaller bearded irises, or
those needing close inspection for this effectiveness. From north
to south there is a general scheme of color beginning with red pur¬
ples, then to blends, next lavenders and near blues, next to them
plicatas, whites, yellow (mostly in front of the whites) and lastly
pinks. Thus far the weakness of the sequence has been in finishing
with too much white, pale blends and pink, and I propose to
use more of the so-called reds with these, for background and to
stiffen the planting. Yellows, particularly some not too deep in
color, could be used with advantage throughout the border, for
these prove far less spotty than whites and serve to brighten up
the whole planting, a function for which they are greatly needed.
Between the bays of the solid iris planting where this merges into
the herbaceous border, groups of red or yellow kniphofias (tri-
tomas), commonly known as red hot pokers, have been planted,
also some of the taller decorative dahlias, a few delphiniums —
more are needed — the lilac pink shrubby Lavatera olbici (the
related hollyhock could replace this in colder climates), and other
tall perennials such as Achillea filipendula and some of the sages.
The effect of this is a great glowing mass of irises in early May
with outposts of the same nearer the house, but after flowering
the growth of tall perennials at the back of the herbaceous border
somewhat screens these and the interest through the long dry
summer is focussed on the plants found there, oriental poppies,
pentstemons, phlox, campanulas, Michaelmas daisies, and pompom
and single chrysanthemums, which carry on until late autumn
along with late flowering annuals. Previous to iris time and dur¬
ing it there are patches of color in the facing herbaceous border,
mainly from tulips, Dutch irises and a few early perennials and
annuals, but never enough to distract attention from the main
feature of the time, the great iris border.

[60]

SCIENCE SERIES— NUMBER 14

CHROMOSOME NUMBERS IN NATIVE AMERICAN AND
INTRODUCED SPECIES AND CULTIVATED

VARIETIES OF IRIS

L. F. Randolph1

* The first account of chromosome numbers in American culti¬
vated irises was published by Longley in 1928 in this Bulletin
(2). Most of the 36 horticultural varieties of bearded iris which
he examined were diploids with 24 somatic chromosomes. The
following year Simonet in France reported on chromosome studies
in many additional species and varieties, including representa¬
tives of all the important sections of the genus (5). Among the
Tall Bearded irises, in addition to diploids, Simonet discovered
triploids with 36 chromosomes, tetraploids with 48, and one
pentaploid with 62 chromosomes. Of special importance was his
discovery that the large flowered Asiatic species, trojana, cypri-
ana , mesopotamica and macrantha were tetraploids. These and
related forms were introduced into Europe late in the 19th cen¬
tury and began to be used extensively in crosses with very favor¬
able results early in the 20th century. Simonet also emphasized
the fact that, in Iris as in other plant genera, there is a close
correlation between high number of chromosomes and larger size
of the plant and its flowers. Recently Nicholls (4) reviewed
briefly the literature on Iris chromosomes and cited a number
of my counts.

A knowledge of chromosome number is prerequisite to a genetic
interpretation of breeding behavior, since the hereditary factors
or genes are carried by the chromosomes. This is especially true
among polyploids. Inheritance in diploids differs markedly from
that in tetraploids, or other polyploids. For example, the ordi¬
nary diploid 3 :1 ratio usually becomes a 35 :1 ratio in the tetra-

1 Associate Cytologist, XJ. S. Department of Agriculture and Research As¬
sociate, Cornell University. Cooperative investigation between the Office of
Cereal Crops and Diseases, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Department of Ag¬
riculture and the Department of Botany, N. Y. State College of Agriculture,
Ithaca, N. Y.

[61]

ploid because the latter has four instead of two sets of homolo¬
gous chromosomes. Triploids are highly unstable types and
differ fundamentally from both the diploids and tetraploids in
breeding behavior. Although triploids themselves are often of
considerable value in that they may exhibit hybrid vigor and
flower profusely, they are invariably less fruitful than the parent
forms and yield progeny lacking in vigor and fertility. Before
a genetic analysis of such crosses can be made it is necessary to
know the chromosome numbers of the parents.

The following chromosome counts were obtained chiefly from
material supplied by Colonel J. C. Nicholls, and from collections
in the Iris Test Gardens of the Department of Floriculture of
Cornell University. I am indebted also to Miss Grace Sturtevant
for specimens of Caterina and the original cypriana of Foster;
also to Professor J. I. Hutchinson for bulbs of histrioides. The
counts were made from root-tip preparations, and are given as
the unreduced or somatic numbers. The native American species
and varieties and the introduced species and varieties are listed
separately ; within these lists the arrangement is according to
chromosome number. Occasionally different collections of sup¬
posedly the same species or variety had different chromosome
numbers, and among a relatively small number of types in which
counts previously had been made by other workers there were
a few cases of non-correspondence in number. These deviations
are best referred to differences in identification or nomenclature
until definite proof of the identity of the forms in question has
been established.

The native American irises, on the, basis of these counts, fall
mainly into four groups, (1) a 42-chromosome group including
fulva , (2) a 44-chromosome group including foliosa , (3) forms
with 43 chromosomes including D. K. Williamson ( fulva x foliosa)
and several “species” of Small and Alexander which presumably

are also hybrids between members of the 42- and 44-chromosome
groups, and (4) forms with approximately 70 chromosomes, repre¬
sented by virginica and other similar or identical types. On the
basis of chromosome number the native American irises appear
to be quite distinct from other sections of the genus.

[62]

IRIS CHROMOSOME NUMBERS
Native American Species and Varieties

pseudacorus .

. 34

elephant ina .

. 44

pseudacorus gigantea .

. 34

foliosa .

. 44

giganticaerulea .

. 44

setosa .

. 38

hexagona alba .

. 44

setosa UooTceri .

. 38

lancipetala .

. 44

re galls .

. 44

August Flame .

. 42

Autumn Fire .

. 42

Charles Hardee .

. 70

Chef Menteur .

. 42

Frenier .

. 70

fulva .

. 42

Oglethorpe .

. 70

giganticaerulea .

. 42

shrevei .

. 70

Nicholls 105 .

. 42

virginiea .

. 71

cliry so Phoenicia .

. 43

D. K. Williamson .

. 43

Autauga

fourchiana .

. 43

Nicholls 102 .

versicolor .

. 108

eerasina .

. 43

vinicolor .

. 43

The outstanding’ feature of the chromosome number relations
among the introduced species and varieties of Bearded Iris is
> the polyploid series with 12 as the base number, and the preva¬
lence of many forms with deviations of one or a few chromosomes
from the base number or some multiple of it. Irregularities in
chromosome pairing and disjuction at the reduction divisions as
reported by Longley and by Simonet, probably account for much
of this, especially among the tetraploids. In histrioides an un¬
paired chromosome fragment was present and there Avas some
evidence of similar fragments in other forms, which Avoid d also
account for variations in number. Since Iris is propagated Arege-
tatively, the off-type (hypo- and hyperploid) numbers are per¬
petuated more extensively than in plants propagated only from
seed.

IRIS CHROMOSOME NUMBERS
Introduced Species and Varieties

histrioides . 17 Prairie Gold . 24

Princess Beatrice . 24

Flammenschwert

Gay Hussar .

Gleam .

Gold Imperial
Mandraliscae ...

Odoratissima ...

[63]

Rubyd . 24

variegata . 24

Cordelia . 25

Frieda Mohr . 25

Lodestar . 25

Nebraska . 25

pcrsica . 7 . 26

sibirica . 28

Aksarben . 36

Azurea . 36

Ballerine . 36

Coronation . 36

Frieda Mohr . 36

Imperial . 36

Isoline . 36

Jcasiimiriana . 36

King Tut . 36

Queen Caterina . 36

San Gabriel . 36

Ticonderoga . 36

Graminea . 40

reiclienb acini . 40

Soledad . 44

Crysoro . 45

Maygold . 45

Autumn King . 46

cypriana (Foster) . 46

Santa Barbara . 46

Baldwin . 47

Moonlight . 47

Purissima . 47

San Francisco . 47

Amas . 48

Candlelight . } . 48

Caterina . 48

El Capitan . 48

Esplendido . 48

Fire God . 48

Helios . 48

Jcashmiriana . 48

mesopotamica . 48

Morning Splendor . 48

Nene . . . 4.8

Nicholls 2930 (Kashmir White x

Gold Imperial) . 48

Nicholls 2931 (Kashmir White x

Gold Imperial) . 48

Omaha . 48

Red Robe . 48

Shasta . 48

Souv. de Loetitia Michaud . . 48

Valor . 48

Cardinal . 49

Conquistador . 49

Los Angeles . 49

Nicholls 11428 (Seminole x

Shasta) . 49

Rosakura . 49

Ambassadeur . 50

Argentina . 50

Beau Sabreur . 50

Desert Gold . 50

Dominion . 50

Duquesne . 50

Kashmir White . 50

L. A. Williamson . 50

Nicholls 3558 (Ambassadeur x

Rubyd) . 50

Nicholls 765 (Shekinah adv.) .... 50

Miss Willmott . 51

Nicholls 7402 (Kashmir White x
Dominion) . 51

Nicholls 7246 (Miss Willmott x
Cardinal) . 52

Magnifica . 60

Rhea . 60

The Dwarf Bearded irises represented in the list by Graminea
and reichenbachii, and by pumila and chamaeiris counted by
Simonet, are exceptional in that they have 40 chromosomes. The
Intermediates which I have counted have either 44 or 45 chromo¬
somes and are clearly hybrids between tetraploid Tall Bearded
forms and the Dwarfs.

In many instances plants with different chromosome numbers,
particularly those belonging to different number series, cross with
difficulty or not at all. Therefore, it is interesting from the
cytogenetic standpoint that the Dwarf Bearded irises cross quite
readily with the tetraploid Tall Bearded irises. As an example,
Soledad [44] 2 ( trojana [48] x pumila [40]) may be cited. In
genera other than Iris, such hybrids ordinarily are partially or
completely sterile.

Ordinarily it is quite difficult to obtain hybrids between the
diploids and tetraploids, but the parentage (1) given for Queen
Caterina [36] (Queen of May [24] 3 x Caterina [48]) indicates
that the cross has been made successfully in Iris. However, many
of the supposed hybrids between diploid and tetraploid irises (3)
probably are not true hybrids, as for example, Dominion [50]
(Cordelia [25] x Amas [48]), Caterina [48] ( cypriana (48, x
pallida [24]), Valor [48] (Ambassadeur [50] x Rubyd [24]),
etc., since the chromosome number of these hybrids is not inter¬
mediate between those of the parents. On the other hand some
of the seedlings of tetraploids, such as San Gabriel [36] ( meso -

pot arnica [48] x _ ) undoubtedly do represent crosses of this

type. There is little or no evidence from the chromosome counts
to indicate that progeny have been obtained at all extensively
from the triploids. When intercrossed they would not be ex¬
pected to breed true for chromosome number but would produce
mostlv individuals with numbers somewhat less or somewhat more
than 36. Likewise triploid x tetraploid and triploid x diploid
crosses would give numbers intermediate between those of the
parents. Such numbers are conspicuously lacking among the Tall
Bearded varieties.

In this connection it should be noted that hybrids between
forms with unlike chromosome numbers occasionally may be
produced, which do not have numbers intermediate between those
of the parents. This may result from the functioning of un¬
reduced gametes, usually those of the seed parent. Such an as¬
sumption offers the most plausible explanation for the origin of

2 Chromosome numbers are enclosed by brackets in the formulae.

3 Unpublished data of Dr. Edgar Anderson.

Rhea [60], a seedling of Isoline [36], and might also account for
the origin of Dominion from Cordelia and Amas. But the origin
of the pentaploid Magnifica [60] from Ricardi [48] and Amas
[48] could not be accounted for in the same way; it could, how¬
ever, if the pollen parent was a diploid rather than a tetraploid,

i.e., an unreduced 48-chromosome gamete of a tetraploid in com¬
bination with a normally reduced 12-chromosome gamete of a
diploid would produce a 60-chromosome pentaploid.

In a large, diversified genus such as Iris, with many species and
cultivated varieties comprising several relatively distinct groups
or sections, the importance of the cytogenetic viewpoint in the
production of new and improved types can scarcely be over¬
emphasized. This is particularly true since it has been demon¬
strated that there is widespread variation in chromosome number
throughout the genus. Within the Bearded section alone there
are two polyploid series, one based on 10 as the reduced number,
and another on 12 with diploid, triploid, tetraploid and pentaploid
representatives. Prom the standpoint of compatibility very dif¬
ferent results are to be expected in crosses between different mem¬
bers of a polyploid series, or between the members of different
series; and the hybrids are often partially or completely sterile.
Likewise the manner of segregation of individual characters in
polyploids is very different from the mode of segregation of simi¬
lar characters in diploids. The application of cytogenetic facts
and principles along with practical knowledge and experience
should be especially helpful in Iris breeding investigations.

LITERATURE CITED

1. American Iris Society. Alphabetical Iris Check List. 1929.

2. Longley, A. E. 1928. Chromosomes in Iris species. A.I.S.
Bulletin 29 :43-49.

3. Mitchell, Sydney B. 1933. Meditations on breeding Bearded
Irises. The Iris Year Book pp. 33-36.

4. Nicholls, J. C. 1933. Iris Chromosomes. A.I.S. Bulletin
47:79-83; 48:56-60.

5. Simonet, M. 1929. Le nombre des chromosomes chez les
Iris. Bull. Soc. Nat. d’Hort. Prance 5th ser. 2:88-94.

[GG ]

THE BREEDING OF YELLOW IRISES
Sydney B. Mitchell

■ Inasmuch as I have stressed in my breeding of recent years
the improvement of yellow bearded irises in size, height, branch¬
ing and range and depth of color and have had some measure of
success in my efforts, enough so that I propose now to taper off
my endeavors in this field, others may be interested in some
rather casual notes of my experiences.

Many years ago, while my own crossings were elementary and
still few, I met the late William Mohr, one of our really great
breeders. Interested then in both the gerden use of irises and
their commercial introduction, I urged on him more attention to
the breeding of better yellows. His early efforts were in combin¬
ing the yellow of the dwarf bearded varieties such as Orange
Queen, not a true pumila, with the big Asiatic lavenders, Soledad,
from 7. trojana and Primavera, from mesopot arnica, being evi¬
dences of the potency of the yellow in the rather insignificant
other parent, a yellow which in remote ancestry still has a place
in my newest seedlings. Astonishingly enough that grand pinkish
iris, Frieda Mohr, was the result of working for a yellow in this
way. Mr. Mohr’s tragic death cut short his wrork and at the
same time was responsible for my withdrawal from the commer¬
cial growing of irises to the breeding field. From his seedlings
or seed I got material which now several generations back ap¬
pears in the pedigree of the large yellows introduced from my
garden, but the only yellow of his breeding which was named
after his death was Bonita, one of a lot of yellow seedlings from
Ramona X Shekinah, most of them considerably deeper yellows
than the pollen parent.

In the early twenties we did not know that the small yellows
bred from yellow variegatas, Shekinah, Mrs. Neubronner for ex¬
ample, had a low chromosome count, generally 24, while the big
Asiatic lavenders or the whites bred from them usually had
twice that number, a situation which made their combination a
very difficult though not an impossible matter. In theory at least
the chances would be much improved by using the larger chromo¬
some numbered variety as seed parent and the smaller for pol¬
len, yet two of the important unnamed seedlings in my yellow

[67]

breeding were Shekinah X Argentina, a good cream which only
looked yellow when I had on my amber glasses, and Mrs. Neu-
bronner X Marian Mohr, an awful little bronzy runt which I
was unable to keep alive but which was a useful parent. From
these two seedlings came Mirasol and Rayo de Sol, real advances
in yellow, the former being not an easy but a promising parent.

It was, however, the difficulty of getting size and height which
turned me toward other possibilities. Crosses of available yellows
with the big whites did not give deep enough color, so considera¬
tion was given to other possibilities of getting deeper yellow and
substance capable of holding up against our California sun. My
theory was that if a yellow red or bronze iris were crossed with
a white, preferably a warm white, that is one with some yellow in
it, that a few pure real yellows might result from the operations
of the factors for albinism. Red bronzes like Sherbert or the red
bronze Alcazar X Esplendido seedling I used contain both the
blue anthocyanin soluble coloring matter and the yellow plastic
color. As albinos were commonly the result of crossing whites
with lavenders, it was evident the factors for albinism could
eliminate lavender or blue but might leave the yellow plastic
coloring matter. A cross of a fairly large Shekinah X Argentina
cream seedling with a large reddish bronze Alcazar X Esplendido
seedling proved easy to make both ways, because here both had
apparently the same large chromosome number, and among the
many seedlings were a very few which were practically self yel¬
lows of size, height, and good branching habit.

The best of these my 6-12, eventually named Alta California,
now well established and in some quantity in the nursery of
Carl Salbacli who owns the stock, was certainly the upstanding
and outstanding tall yellow iris in that garden this year, and
though it got off to a bad start from being judged from newly
planted specimens it has both justified itself and this theory of
yellow breeding. Its best reciprocal, my 6-98, never named, when
crossed with Alta California gave one quite lovely deep rich
yellow, which unfortunately has a weakness of stem which has
prevented its introduction.

California Gold, my 1933 yellow introduction, also illustrates
the validity of this warm white X bronzy red procedure. Its
seed parent w7as a cream from the same Shekinah X Argentina
crossed with another creamy white, and its pollen parents the red
Grace Sturtevant, a flower which unquestionably contains y el-

168 ]

Happy Bays, a

new large bright yellow iris which is being introduced this
year from Prof. Mitchell’s garden.

[ 69 ]

low, as I have had many not quite good enough variegatas from it.
California Gold is a great big flower of very strong clear yellow,
so bold that its original nickname was Brazen Hussy, a color I
have not approached in any other flower but its own seedlings,
and a variety more likely to be suited to wetter, colder climates
than its Californian birthplace. Like Grace Sturtevant it is a
relatively slow increaser and is not widely distributed as the ma¬
jority of the few plants available were bought by amateurs who
saw it in flower in my garden. It has good pollen and sets seed
readily.

Still another seedling, my 9-33, bears out the importance of
this idea. It was never introduced, but under the tentative name
of Montecito it was the seed parent of Happy Days, to be re¬
ferred to later. Its seed parentage w7as my 6-223, [ (mesopotamica
X Oriflamme) X Gaviota] X Soledad, a rather dirty cream, with
a bronzy red Sherbert X Esplendido, while its pollen parent, my
6-13, was a creamy Argentina X Mme. Cheri crossed with the
same bronzy red Alcazar X Esplendido used in the breeding of
Alta California. The result of this complicated series of crosses
was a tall yellow of the form of Santa Barbara and, at its best,
as large as that lavender variety. It has been a wonderful
breeder.

A next step in yellow breeding was to combine good yellows
with red bronzes, a procedure I believed even more likely to
deepen the shade of yellow than would be the crossing of two
good yellows. The results here were very varied and in the first
generation gave many yellows, though I doubt if I ever name any
of that lot. My 9-17, a deep rich buff yellow, was from the 6-13
mentioned above crossed with King Midas, a fine plant which by
the kindness of my late friend Franklin B. Mead I was privileged
to use before its introduction. In the next generation the pollen
of 9-17 on, Helios gave me my most startling 1934 seedling, 1-12,
a tall pure orange slightly flushed brown on the haft, a break in
color so distinct that even when its orange buds were still un¬
opened I was asked to put a price on a rhizome sight unseen.
The use of the reddish bronze King Midas with Alta California
gave several nice large deep bronze yellows, and, heaven alone
knows why, one yellow ground plicata, this last only a fair
flower in size or shape. Still another yellow seedling of different
parentage bred with King Midas both ways gave some interesting
coppery bicolors, one of which has been registered as Anaconda.

[70]

Of all the Cayeux yellows I have used Helios most in breeding*.
It appears to me to be an Alcazar seedling and therefore related
to Fortuna and Sundew. Crossed with pollen of my large red
Rubeo, a Cardinal, Sherbert, Esplendido derivative, it gave ex¬
clusively reds, but when King Midas was used with it I got blends,
rosy reds (one a lovely new shade), and variegatas, the best of
these last since registered as Portola, a flower of good size, fine
form, and fine coloring close to the old Iris King. So I remember
it from last year, before I cut it up so that this year it failed
to flower. Rubeo crossed with several of my yellow seedlings gave
both tall reds and yellows, but none of the latter as good or as
deep in color as I had hoped I might get.

From now on, with the spade work over and many good yel¬
lows of different parentage available, the improvements will
probably come more slowly and be mainly due to large scale com¬
bining of the best existing yellows. From the crossing of many
of my own I have improvements on either parent, and from that
seedling 9-33, already discussed, crossed with pollen of W. R.
Dykes I obtained the huge and shapely pure yellow which under
the name of Happy Days caused invocations to the Deity by
several harclboiled iris breeders when they first saw it in my gar¬
den this season. In its two flowerings it has shown no signs of
blotches, indeed in the dozens of Dykes seedlings I have raised
blotching has been noticeably absent, because, I believe, the other
parent has always been a pure yellow with no lavender or
purple in its recent parentage. I cannot wax enthusiastic over
most of the Dykes seedlings as I do not care for the persistance of
its form in its progeny, and I therefore consider myself lucky
that 9-33 had apparently in its complicated family tree just
those qualities needed to get the best out of Dykes in the first
generation. Next year and the following one I should flower
second generation yellows from Dykes, but I begin to tire of
breeding yellow irises, as doubtless you do of reading about them
in this necessarily very personal account of one breeder’s work.

[71]

VARIETAL NOTES

New Varieties in Northern California. By S. L. Jory.

* To one living in Berkeley (Calif.), the mention of new iris
immediately brings forth a picture of Sydney Mitchell’s beauti¬
ful hillside garden with its hundreds of fine big seedlings, mostly
yellows. A few of these have been introduced to the public, and
some are being held for further observation. Most, however, have
been already eliminated. I can testify to this with full authority,
as I have become a self-appointed discard man in Sydney’s gar¬
den. (What glee a man can have playing grim reaper in another’s
seedling patch.)

Considering seedlings blooming for the first time this season
as still in the experimental stage, and therefore disregarding them,
the Mitchell garden nevertheless contained some real treasures.
First of all comes Happy Days, the immense clear yellow that
looms in the minds of all who have been fortunate enough to see
it. It is an iris that seems to have all the qualities so long sought
for by breeders of yellows. This flower marks one of the great,
steps in iris achievement and rewards Mr. Mitchell for many
years of patient effort. Hidden from view when approached in
one particular direction, it was customary to bring new sight¬
seers “ around the mountain” so that Happy Days might burst
upon them in full glory. And what fun waiting for the first
comments — or, in some cases, speechless admiration.

California Gold, introduced last year, might have rivalled
Happy Days for showiness, but there was no “show” this year.
All but one of the blooming size rhizomes having been sold, only
one bloom was left for Berkeley. It displayed, however, the same
bright brassy coloring that made it so popular a year ago, and
also the same finely formed blooms. Sunol, a yellow blend that
vaguely reminds one of the small and ancient Ochracea, was also
fine. I also liked Peacemaker, named because its porcelain and
light blue coloring acts as a foil when planted between varieties
of conflicting coloring.

One could not leave the subject of the Mitchell iris introduc¬
tions without mentioning two of the older ones — Natividad and
Alta California. Both have merited all the praise that has ever
been given them. Natividad combines purity, gracefulness, and
brightness in a manner that I have never seen in any other iris.

It is not the largest, nor the showiest, bnt it is definitely one of
the most pleasing iris that anyone ever grew. Alta California,
now in sufficient stock to be shown in mass, decidedly proves its
value — being a tall, branching yellow that adds a necessary note
in the garden. It is one of, if not the most striking mass in the
whole field of iris.

Stepping next door from Professor Mitchell’s, I find myself
in Carl Salbach’s garden. Although shown under the same
conditions as a whole field of other neAV varieties, three of Mr.
Salbach’s new iris attracted most of the attention. They are
Brunhilde (deep violet), Dark Knight (deep ruby red), and Neon
(red bronze). It would be difficult to choose between these
three — the choice being largely a matter of preference between
types. Brunhilde is a fine intense blue violet that is markedly
better than any other iris of the same class I have ever seen. Dark
Knight is a big, bold reddish or maroon colored variety, but I
run to cover when asked for a detailed color description. It
stands out because it is so definitely a dark iris, yet still remains
bright and showy. Neon, a well-named iris, is a real “find.” On
tall, well branched stalks laden with blossoms, the bright rich
red falls, and glowing golden bronze standards combine to form
a most outstanding and admired iris.

Two other varieties demand a word. One — Eleanor Blue — is a
fine soft, warm blue variety of good form and finish. It is an iris
that you like better each time you look at it. Pink Jewel, the
other, is very definitely a small iris, but in mass, it is most effec¬
tive. I hesitate to call any iris “pink” with no qualifying re¬
marks, but this one conies mighty close, particularly under
artificial light.

Three blocks away, just over the top of the hill, lie the gardens
of Professor Essig. Unfortunately the best of his new iris of this
year were sent almost entirely to his introducer, so blossoms Avere
not to be seen in Berkeley this season. Tavo of his introductions
of last year, hoAvever, bloomed in full glory.

Shining Waters, a tall light blue of splendid form and with a
host of blossoms on each stalk, Avas striking, indeed. When bet¬
ter light blues are bred, I’d like to see them, as this one is a real
iris. Tenava is another fine one, being almost exactU of Modoc
coloring, but much taller, and of better branching habit.

In addition, of course, I have seen some really fine seedling
creations, but discussing these too early in their career is, 1
believe, too dangerous a pastime.

[73]

Californian Irises in Massachusetts. By R. S. Sturtevant.

It was in 1921 that Miss Sturtevant received an F. C. C. from
the Massachusetts Horticultural Society on Balboa (Mohr, 1923),
and it was in 1923 (the year that she also listed the first seedlings
from Mr. Sass), that she introduced the first California hybrids,
those of Mr. William Mohr. These were the Korolkowi hybrids
Carmelo and later Bellorio both of which received English honors
in 1924. (William Mohr was still under number.) There was
Balboa, a Parisiana X mesopotamica hybrid and there were less
interesting children of good quality, Prince Lohengrin and the
twins Ramona and Silverado duller and smaller Dolly Madisons.
Marion Mohr, Azulado (these palest blue in tint) Soledad, Rosado
(blush), and, very shortly Santa Barbara were a bit later and of
outstanding quality in their height and size. The first, a seedling
of Miss Willmott X Carthusian, did not prove reliably hardy
but is one of the great, great, greats of Shining Waters (Essig)
which might well owe its lustrious sheen of blue to Marian.

The poor, very gravelly loam of Miss Sturtevant ’s garden seems
suited to these so-called tender irises and even after 20 below zero
this last winter and only a slight covering of burlap the Cali¬
fornians were in as fine bloom as the natives.

I think our real interest in Californian hybrids is their height
and size combined with varied colorings. Though perhaps only
10 per cent or less of mesopotamica, cypriana, blood enters into
the more recent introductions we still look for these characteris¬
tics and, unfortunately, we seem to be possessed with the idea that
even a 10 per cent strain makes for lack of resistance to cold, a
quite erroneous impression in many cases.

The fact that they can also grow Oncocyclus and Regelias leads
us to expect successors to William Mohr which, incidentally, I
found in fine form after our tough winter. As a matter of fact
Persian Princess (as rich as Louis Bel) is the only out cross I
have seen recently, and even a young plant of that was in good
form this spring.

In considering the relatively few new things I have seen it
seems well to roughly group the varieties by color.

Whites:

Argentina (Mohr) which closely parallels Micheline Charraire
is even more unreliable in the quality of its bloom.

Easter Morn (Essig) has been grand for three years now with
its beautifully flaring falls, its lack of conspicuous haft retie ula-

[74]

tion and all round quality. Last year, near Chicago, I also saw
it in perfection in a private garden. Venus de Milo (Ayres) is
a surprisingly close pocket edition.

Natividad (Mohr-Mit.) should, I suppose, be listed among the
yellows as it is a warm ivory of almost velvety texture.

New Albion (Essig). A delightfully crisp blue-white and very
pure.

Purissima (Mohr-Mit.) is that blue-white which shows up so
wonderfullv in a show.

Shasta (Mohr-Mit.). An older blue-white that is almost for¬
gotten.

Sitka (Essig). A blue-white comparable to Wambliska but
with more flaring falls and even finer height and substance.

Sweet Alibi (White, C. G.). Like Natividad, more yellow
than white due to the amber yellow heart. This was described
as “Ivory” in 1932 and received an H. M. Its exceptional tex¬
ture was noticeable even on a first year plant.

Yellows:

I am frankly prejudiced against many of the new so-called
yellows they are so pale and so often of a greenish hue. To find
W. R. Dykes and Desert Gold not even registering % strength of
the lightest Ridgeway tone is at least disappointing. Lady Para¬
mount did not bloom in New England this year but Sweet Alibi
is said to be similar and it is certainly richer looking than Desert
Gold.

Alta California (Mohr-Mit.). An olive yellow (rather dull)
with a marked flush on the fall. A greatly improved Endymion
and I like its sleek form.

California Gold. A new plant seen after a hard winter but the
color a rich Empire yellow and the form excellent.

Mirasol and Rayo de Sol, I just do not like though they are
dark.

Primavera (Mohr-Mit.) is an old, very early flowering (and
hence worthwhile) variety of size without height.

Rae (Lothrop). Ivory deepening to amber yellow in the center
— a nice flower.

Soledad (Mohr), very early, far from large but a good clean
yellow. I still like it.

Sunol is generally considered finer than California Gold per¬
haps, but it is less intense and I am tempted to call it a vastly
improved Alta California. I rated it at 89.

[75]

Yellow Pearl (Salbach) was not deep but of lovely substance
and promising.

Blues:

I still want small blues like Bluet, Joya, Corrida, Jacqueline
Guillot, Sensation, but I want also some of the big new up¬
standing things which really do surpass the old pallidas complete¬
ly and particularly so as seifs. The new Shining Waters is
as pale as the older Pale Moonlight, wliicli won a medal as the
finest stalk in the 1933 Boston Show, and both are well named.
Pacific is a bit darker and then only slightly darker but varying
shape and carriage come Blue and Gold, Sierra Blue, San
Diego (the only one not an Essig seedling) and Osprey (Berry)
with its more conspicuous haft and beard. Blue Gown, as I re¬
member it is deeper and Paloma shorter stalked but as dark
while Modoc is so rich as to be called a purple. I should like to
see neighboring clumps of Modoc, Motif, and Meldoric for com¬
parison. Except for California I question whether we need these
light toned ones except as an occasional high spot. The Essig
seedlings however do give unusual uniformity of tone.

Others:

I seem to have made few notes as to darks and blends. Thev are
difficult to remember, one from another, at best ; one is a bit
pinker, the next redder, and the third duller in either standard
or fall. Think of neighboring clumps of Duart, Mary Geddes,
Coralie, Trails End, a few other beauties and, in a short
time, where are you? Hollywood (Essig) belongs here though it
is taller and much pinker. Bronze Beacon (Salbach) is much
richer in tone than these and verges towards the variegata-blend
Picador. Senorita (Mohr-Mit) is pale suggesting the ancient
Dalmarius in its contrast of cream buff and lilac while Red Flare
(Milliken) has velvety deep Bordeaux falls which brings us
into the range of Indian Chief, Dauntless, etc. I wonder. Does
California prefer blues and light tones or does the balance of
the country prefer blends and darks and reds or is it still a
matter of getting certain colors linked with certain strains that
like the climate.

Pinks:

Rosado (Mohr) was as I remember it darker than Imperial
Blush or Airy Dream but it had height and size and even better
form. Freida Mohr (Molir-Mit.) is useful despite its ungainly
form and the color rather telling.

Plicatas:

Though San Francisco with its frilled standards was the
first big plicata to be seen in the East I think we all prefer Los
Angeles with its color concentrated more at the center. Sacra¬
mento is too darkly flushed and dotted to interest me much
but they all mark a big step upward in height at least over
True Charm and True Delight or the still older Anna Farr and
Camelot. Plicatas do not normally serve as reliable parents but
in other respects one of this lot is as much of an advance as
Caterina, Alcazar, Shekinah or Dominion in its day.

Ten years ago I was writing about what the use of trojana and
cypriana had done for height and branching and size as ex¬
emplified in Lord of June, Lady Foster, Caterina, Asia, and
Mme. Durrand. There were many big blue bicolors, a few blends.
The Dominion Race was developing and its stocky, close branching
is still to be found all too apparent in many of our new darks.
We have had a period of rich Dominion progeny. We are in a
sea of good blends both light and dark. We have made enorm¬
ous progress in the plicatas, in whites, in light yellows and Cali¬
fornia is well in the lead in all of these groups, if we consider
quality and do not stress ability to withstand cold and neglect.
In my opinion we are still striving to divide intensity (as found
in Cardinal, Blue Velvet, Thuratus or a real variegata) from a
tendency towards lack of height and size and adequate branching.
I have just finished a hundred odd careful descriptions of such
novelties as our bad winter left us and again and again a goodly
number of branches have been so short and placed at such an
acute angle with the stalk that the opening flower hits the main
stem if not its neighbor as well. If the season be cool and the
flowers open in succession, a close-branched stalk may possess
splendid poise but a few hot days bring crowded spikes of bloom.

The 1934 winter was wicked in New England. There was below
zero temperature and bare ground, again after an ice storm, and
again with snow. Where ice gathered in slight hollows the loss
was almost 100 per cent of bloom and sometimes that high of
stock. And in such a location the old pallida-variegatas went as
thoroughly as the % Cyprianas or Trojanas. Probably every
breeder in the country has a majority of seedlings with a per¬
centage of so-called tender blood. The weaklings among the seed¬
lings and among the introductions drop out. Why can we not
publish the possible influence of certain parents but forget re-

1 77 ]

gional differences and value our irises for their intrinsic quality?
In a few years some varieties will be everywhere and others only
in certain gardens but each will reveal its own individual per¬
fection.

Miss Sturtevant has grown these questionable varieties in the
open garden as long as anyone in the country. She has failed
with mesopotamica, with Marian Mohr, occasionally with Asia,
J. B. Dumas, Michel Line Charraire, or Lady Foster but she has
succeeded with the great majority.

An Iris Jaunt. By Mrs . Thomas Nesmith

■ In the early part of May I started on an Iris Jaunt, taking
in some of the southern and middle states gardens, finally end¬
ing with most of our New England gardens, and I have been
asked to give you brief notes on some of the irises by which I
was especially impressed.

My first visit was to Nashville, Tenn., where I arrived May
10th, and found the bearded irises in full flower. Several other
iris enthusiasts were there when I arrived, more came each day,
until there must have been at least twelve of us, busily engaged in
looking over the new seedlings of Dr. Kirkland, Mr. Connell and
Mr. Washington. We found many new and lovely irises, some
which were blooming for the first time, as well as others which
had been selected in past years as being of especial merit. There
were also splendid displays of their own named introductions.

The garden of Dr. Kirkland was a mass of glowing color, with
a surprising amount of white, yellow and copper toned irises,
with here and there new reds, deep blues and many lovely blends.
The following notes are of some that most impressed me.

Little America, a new pure white iris of excellent form and
texture. It seems to be the most white of any of the newer irises.

At Dawning, this seemed even better than when I discovered it
among the seedlings of last year. A tall sturdy iris of arbutus
pink tones, with standards lighter than the falls ; the flowers have
a thick firm substance and are carried on strong well branched
stems.

Satan, a deep blue-black iris of strong growth and good height,
much darker than Black Wings. Different judges commented on
its fine form and deep velvety substance.

Copper Lustre was just as splendid and outstanding as in
1933. The coppery tone of this iris is a new break in color and I
have been told that the California iris Brown Betty is nearest to
it in hue.

Junaluska, a flower of rose, gold and copper; a subtle blending
of color which is difficult to describe.

Aztec is a brilliant gold and coppery blend with intense gold
in the throat of the flower; the nearest to it is Spokan (J. Sass).

Dr. Kirkland has a series of these new coppery toned irises.
Among them being, Ojibway, Orilia and Magnetawan. He also
has some very lovely yellows, one which we especially noted, has
excellent form and substance and will be registered this year.
Fearless is a red-purple self with well formed flowers, the glowing-
color gives it great garden value.

Mr. Connell has several seedlings of great promise growing at
Dauntless Hill as well as in his town garden. Among them is
one called Frost Fairy, an ice-blue self of almost pure white tone
with very heavy and smooth finish.

Blithesome, a beautiful soft yellow flower of almost velvety
substance and excellent form with well branched stalks. This iris
is attracting great attention.

Parthenon, a tall and stately white with semi-flaring falls and
domed standards; flowers have very good substance, the stalks are
tall and well branched with many flowers which bloom over a
long season.

In the garden of Mr. Washington we find not only bearded
irises of fine form and color, but his years of patient work in
selective breeding of the Southern States irises as well as the
spurias have resulted in two new series of beardless irises
which are extremely hardy in our northern gardens and much
more beautiful than any of the species which are in their
parentage.

Of the newer bearded irises which Mrs. Stahlman and Mr.
Washington have produced, the following were noted by visitors
and especially commended.

Jeb Stuart was pronounced by many as the finest deep brown-
red, with black overtone* upon the falls and intense orange
beard ; forty inches tall with low branched stalk.

Peer Gynt, a large flowered plicata with flaring horizontal
falls; lighter in tone than Sacramento and an entirely new type
of plicata.

[79]

Stonewall Jackson, a rich velvety red variegata with intense
coloring and excellent form ; of great garden value.

Betty Nesmith, a rich buttercup yellow flower of perfect shape
and size, with just a faint flush of bronze upon the falls ; flowers
of heavy substance and smooth finish borne on well branched
stalks.

Cavalcade (name to be approved). Intense rose red with cop¬
per undertone ; flowers of especially fine form and substance on
low and widely branched stalks ; 17 flowers and buds counted
on one stalk.

Maya, a deep strawberry red with background of bronze and
copper, intense orange beard ; falls deeper and very velvety.

Will o’ the Wisp (name to be approved). A large yellow and
white bi-color, with standards of yellow and falls almost pure
white ; tall and well branched.

There were many lovely hybrids of the Southern States irises
which were blooming for the first time, as well as those which
have been named in recent years. All visitors were greatly im¬
pressed with their beauty and superiority over the species of this
type of irises.

The hybrid spuria irises were really a revelation for most of
us have been accustomed to the older forms with tucked under
falls and somewhat twisted standards, but these have straight
flaring falls and smooth well placed standards. Some are j3ure
white, others in cream tones, as well as blue and lavender seifs.
One that attracted great attention had large velvety falls of
yellow with almost white standards, another of pale hazy blue
with golden bronze blended with smoky blue on the falls. These
and the Washington hybrids of the Southern States irises must
be seen to be appreciated for they bring entirely new breaks in
color. They bloom after the bearded and just before the Japanese,
thus giving great extension of the iris season.

Mr. T. A. Williams of Nashville, has a new garden of irises,
planted in color harmony which is quite delightful, and I noted
some seedlings that seemed to give good promise. One that seemed
more wine colored than Joycette, and another of clear magenta
tone.

Mr. Geddes Douglas is a new hybridizer of irises, but he has one
of entirely new color, a true self of Pompeian red tones and
very delightful.

[80]

I had hoped to go to Lincoln, Nebraska, for the Annual Meet¬
ing of the A. I. S. and to see the irises of Mr. Hans and Jacob
Sass. Many of which I grow in my own garden and greatly admire,
but it would have been a pleasure to see their large number of
named varieties as well as the new seedlings growing in their
own gardens, but much to my regret, the change of date of the
meeting made it impossible for me to do so.

From Nashville I went to Cincinnati where I had intended to
see the irises of Dr. Ayres, but before leaving Nashville, another
iris enthusiast told me that he had a telegram from Dr. Ayres
saying his irises were through blooming, and as my stay in Cin¬
cinnati had to be of short duration, I paid a hurried visit to the
garden of Mrs. Emigholz, where I saw Robert and Cadmia, two
beautifully yellow irises of fine form and substance with tall and
well branched stalks. It is hard to say which is the better for they
are both excellent. Claire de Lune is a charming blue which was
in full flower. Theodolinda, Ningal and Nanook were growing
in great profusion and were in better form than I had ever seen
them and were a pleasing surprise.

M}^ next iris visit was to Ft. Wayne, Indiana, to see the garden
of Mrs. Franklin B. Mead where I had the pleasure of meeting
Air. Riedel. He has collaborated in hybridizing with the late Mr.
Franklin B. Mead for several years and he showed me the beau¬
tiful new seedlings and recently named varieties which were
blooming at Iris Crest.

Both Mrs. Mead and Mr. Riedel were kindness itself, but I
could not help the feeling of great sadness which came over me
when I saw that beautiful garden and realized that Mr. Mead
was no longer there to enjoy all the wonderful color harmony
which he had created and which he loved so intensely.

As I entered the iris garden, I had my first sight of Eros and
it is breath taking in its beauty, a beautiful warm pink with yel¬
low undertone and no trace of lavender pink about it. I cannot
recommend this iris too strongly for it is the finest pink to date.

White Nile is another outstanding iris from this garden. A
magnificent white plicata of Los Angeles type, but even more
beautiful and very hardy and prolific ; 12 to 18 blooms on each
well and deeply branched stalk, forty-six inches tall.

I saw several others that seemed of great promise, Mozambique,
a rich dark purple; Riiages, a dark violet plicata of very smooth

[81]

finish ; Minoan and Florestan are two excellent irises which 1
should judge might have King Midas blood for they are rich in
tawny bronze and gold tones.

From Ft. Wayne I went to Bluff ton, Indiana, and found Mrs.
Williamson and her daughters just as charming and hospitable
as ever, but here again was a feeling of sorrow and loss for Mr.
Williamson was no longer there to greet me and I missed his
helpful advice and comments on iris matters. Mary and Jane
Williamson are carrying on splendidly and when one sees their
vast field of perfectly grown irises, the thought comes of how
pleased their father would be if he knew of their interest and
painstaking care of the irises which he has produced.

Those of newer interest which especially appealed to me are the
following. Chamita, an iris of distinct bronze-brown tones, deeper
than any iris of this type, large well shaped flowers on good
sturdy stems. I liked it very much.

Adobe, an unusual blend of buff and pompeian red, which at
once attracts attention. Moonglo, a rich yellow and copper blend
of pleasing harmony giving an effect of etruscan gold which is
entirely different.

Castalia, sky-blue in tone, with arched standards and broad
falls, of great garden value. Amigo, a blue-purple bi-color with
a delightful light edge around the deep velvet falls which makes
it quite different from others of this tone.

Sundipt, a larger, deeper Pluie d’Or and has immense garden
value. I also saw a very fine deep red with exceedingly velvety
falls which seemed quite different in tone from Ethel Peckham.
This may be named for Mr. Williamson.

I made a brief visit to the garden of Mr. Paul Cook and found
some very good seedlings which are as yet under number. One
a splendid deep velvety black-purple that should be introduced.
There were also two with blue beards and deep velvety blue
color which especially appealed to me ; one not large and essen¬
tially a border iris, the other very dark blue and of excellent
substance and form. He has some nice irises in pink tones and
pinky yellow blends that seemed worthy of further notice. Mr.
Cook is doing work with the hemerocallis as well as with irises
and I am looking forward to the flowering of some of his in my
own garden.

[82]

When I reached home on May 29th, 1 found my own garden
rapidly coming into bloom, but owing to our extremely cold win¬
ter at least seventy-five new varieties which should have flowered
had lost their bloom stalks. This does not apply to the irises
from any one region, and was no doubt due to our 26 below zero
weather with not much snow at the time, but an ice sheet four
inches thick over most of them. Other gardens in New England
suffered in the same way on the newly planted varieties so I can¬
not give reports on many of the newer kinds.

Golden Helmet (J. Sass) bloomed and is a splendid flower
with bronze gold standards, quite ruffled ; falls of rich copper-red
coloring.

Avondale (H. Sass). This iris attracted great attention and I
describe it as an almost fuchsia red self with an exceedingly heavy
yellow beard.

Alta California (Mohr-Mit.), a tall yellow with well formed
flowers, did not show as much bronze on the falls as last year.

Eclat (Gage). A lovely yellow blend on tall graceful stems,
great garden value.

Gold Foam (Nesmith). A deep golden iris, all yellow with
no other color in any part of the flower; ruffled.

Gold Vellum (Gage). Medium yellow with very heavy sub¬
stance and good form, a good iris for border planting.

Imperial Blush (H. Sass). A beautiful iris of pale lavender
pink tone, a great addition to the paler pink class.

King Philip (Fewkes). A handsome blue with violet under¬
tone ; very sweetly scented.

Lady Gage (Gage). A white iris with well formed flowers and
smooth finish.

Maluska (Nesmith). Said by iris judges to be the darkest vel¬
vety self to date. (Wash.-Stahl.).

Mary Geddes (Wash-Stahl.). As always the center of attrac¬
tion in the garden.

Mme. Recamier (Wash.). A beautiful and dainty pale pink
and yellow blend.

Bronze Beacon (Salb.). Well described by the name; golden
bronze standards and velvety Indian lake fall ; tall, well branched.

Thistledown (Sturt.). This iris has the effect of a large
ruffled white and was well liked.

[83]

Gudrun (K. Dykes). The largest white iris that I have ever
seen ; good substance and form, an outstanding iris.

SuNOL (Mohr-Mit.). A yellow blend with very heavy substance,
tall and well branched.

California Gold (Mohr-Mit.). A deep gold iris of medium
height and better substance than AY. K. Dykes. This was a first
year plant and no doubt will be taller another year.

Happy Days (Mohr-Mit.) . The largest deep yellow to elate;
does not have the fleck of AY. E. Dykes and also has more sub¬
stance ; first year plant.

Monomoy (McKee). A gorgeous tall dark blue-purple of excel¬
lent form and size on well branched stalks ; excellent.

Miss June (McKee). A large blue self with horizontal falls
and well domed standards ; good branching.

Shining AYaters (Essig). One of the best of the Essig blues.
Tall and well branched.

Tenaya (Essig). A splendid rich velvety dark purple self;
tall, well branched and of excellent substance.

Pomona (Gage). A deep coppery red of splendid substance
and form. A new iris that attracted much attention.

Good Cheer ( Sturtevant ) . A large well formed variegata
type iris ; very yellow standards with bright rose-maroon falls.
Might be called a better Citronella as to size, form, and color.

Naiad (Sturtevant). A lovely blend of Zaharoon tones, but
deeper and better.

Purple Eve (Tobie). A large purple-red bicolor of good form
and substance, well branched and stands out in the garden.

Spanish Gold (Tobie). A pale yellow iris of excellent form;
very flaring falls with well domed standards on well-branched
stems.

I am sorry not to be able to give reports of other new irises
which are being grown in New England for so few bloomed this
year, but even with the severe winter almost none of them was
killed outright. It may be of interest to know that the AYashing-
ton hvbrids of the Southern States irises were thoroughly hardy
here in New England.

Of the unnamed seedlings of promise which were noted, were
a very lovely yellow of Miss Sturtevant ’s, two tall dark seedlings
of Mr. McKee’s, showing Dominion parentage, a pale olive
cream of Mr. AYashington’s, which might be termed a taller,
larger, and more brilliant Doxa.

[84]

Iris Rumors in Southern California

■ It is rumored that :

In its class San Gabriel still stands supreme.

In spite of all the new white irises Purissima does not have to
take a back seat. Being plentiful her lovely white flowers were
picked and carried to the newer varieties where in comparison
she lost but little of her prestige.

New Albion appears with San Gabriel and is lovely in the same
planting. It blooms on slender wiry stems with plenty of branches
to show off the graceful white flowers. Even if it were not so early
it would be desirable.

Two stems of Wambliska bloomed in Southern California.
They were about eighteen inches tall, close branched and with
flowers that belie its name. One of the plants has been moved
to the mountains to see what it would do there.

Easter Morn was seen on fifty-two-inch stems carrying five
branches — the first low and wide so that the blooms were marvel¬
ously displayed. The flowers were six inches wide and five and a
half high. The petals were broad. It was superb but one irisian
of note did not like the domed standards and flaring, almost
horizontal, falls and another irisian of note did like just that !

Another Day is a pearly white with flue green veins by the
side of the wide cushion of a beard. It is low and widely
branched with broad, round petals. This iris began blooming
February 2nd (before San Gabriel) and after blooming freely
for some weeks, took a short rest then brought forth a second
crop of flowers with the late irises.

Due West is a superlative white iris in form, in stem, in grace
and in color. It is forty-four inches tail with flower five and one
half inches high and five and a half inches wide. This iris will
please those who do not admire the low, wide form. This iris
also preceded San Gabriel in time of blooming.

Embassy bloomed with San Gabriel and Purissima. It is an
impressive white iris. The tall stem had many short branches
with flowers the size of Easter Morn. The flowers had thick sub¬
stance and a glossy sheen. The styles were flesh pink.

Every one is glad that the iris bearing the name, Natividad, is
such a beautiful iris. The forty-six-inch stems are perfectly
branched and carry with dignity and grace the large flowers of
pale yellow. The marvelous golden beards match the gold in the
wide hafts.

[85]

Sweet Alibi is greatly admired by those who have watched it
bloom these three years. It, too, is a large pale yellow with
deeper color in the haft. The petals and hafts are broad and the
substance remarkably heavy. It is very rapid propagator and a
free bloomer.

Lady Paramount was not so tail this year but she still radiated
charm. She continues to come clear in the South though flecks
on her falls were reported from the North.

An Eastern visitor was quite bowled over by Happy Days. He
said it was as large or larger than El Capitan but regretted that
the stem was only thirty-four inches tall which made it too large
for its height. Another visitor said there was a suggestion of
flecking on the falls. There is almost a universal suspicion that
all yellows may possess a recessive trait toward this flecking.

Shining Waters is a very large, very tall iris on a well
branched stem. The color is a deep, clear lavender self.

Santa Fe inherits from Kashmiriana, through several genera¬
tions, most remarkable texture and substance. It also possesses
beautiful form but unfortunately its pale lavender color fades
in this hot sun to a dirty white.

Somebody, is the name of a very satisfactory light violet iris.
It delights in sending out a multitude of new roots to support
flower stems. The stems themselves and flowers are beautifully
arranged. The color, the frosted surface, the heavy substance, the
broad petals, are all that anyone could desire. It began blooming
in January and continued well into April.

Early Mass reminds one in form of Sante Fe. It is also a light
violet but it does not fade. It bloomed on graceful stems 47 inches
tall. It has outstanding grace, beauty of form and poise, besides
beautiful color.

Fair Enough, is much bluer than Somebody and bluer than
Sierra Blue and Shining Waters. It is a stunning iris on splen¬
didly branched forty-two-inch stems. The immense petals are
round. surprising number of flowers are stored in each stalk.
In one garden its first flower opened February 10, in another
garden February 12, and in a third February 14, showing that
it certainly is an early iris. In one of the gardens it wras in
bloom eight weeks.

Pale Moonlight continues to be a favorite. Some claim that
it is superior to Sierra Blue. It grows on tall stems with good
branching. The flowers are large and of beautiful form.

[86]

Sierra Blue, besides being very large, has considerable distinc¬
tion in form and in its surface texture. A well grown clump is
a breath-taking sight. The texture is so close that the flower has
almost the appearance of having been lacquered. It is late
blooming.

Royal Salute is a fine iris in a deeper tone. It resembles Mad.
Gaudichau though by actual comparison it was thought to be a
shade bluer. It is much taller and larger. Gaudichau and Cali¬
fornia Blue are its parents.

Acropolis may be an iris for Californians only but it is certain¬
ly gorgeous here. In one clump two stems were noted fifty-two
inches tall, each stem having six giant open flowers ! it is a blue-
purple bicolor with velvety falls.

Eastern and California judges had only praise for Uriah. It
is rich and dark with dark changeable silk standards and brown-
red velvety falls. The form and branching were ideal and it
bore the intense heat with remarkable equanimity.

The less said about Baldwin the better. It, too, was condemned
to the mountains.

Indian Chief bloomed profusely on rather low sprawling
stalks. It lacks distinction and many other qualities.

Dauntless has characteristics in common with Indian Chief.
The color is muddy.

Ronda .may be a good parent from which to procure reds (?)
but for brightness of tone is superseded already by many seed¬
lings in several gardens.

Rubeo is attractive and was seen in fine form but it certainly
lacks vigor.

Mauna Loa has now been well distributed and one can see its
bright color in most California gardens. It is almost as indis-
pensible as San Gabriel. It blooms early, following closely San
Gabriel.

Of all the eastern irises there is none that performs with more
gratifying regularity than Sequoiah. Perhaps it is on account
of its name — it feels that it "belongs.” Always there is an abun¬
dance of large rich flowers on tall stems and visitors exclaiming
over "that beautiful iris.” As a parent it is only so-so. The
slight fading of color at the edge of the falls and the scarcely
discernable line through the center of the falls are quite domi¬
nant in its offspring — giving at times very lovely effects^ it must
be confessed.

[87]

The blooming of Airy Dream on tall slender stems led to the
hasty discarding of an assortment of “pink” seedlings. It was
lovely, an airy dream, for sure !

Day Dream was disappointing. It seemed to exhaust its wealth
of color in producing unusual length of stem. It has been such
a contrary season ; tall stems on short irises, short stems on tall
irises, crooked on straight and straight on crooked!

Since the first two years of California residence Ambrosia has
not produced the stems that it should. But the flowers are so
beautiful that hope is strong that in time it will become
acclimated.

It is reported that Beau Sabreur flops its standards in the
east. How peculiar that in this hot climate they stand up like
three miniature palm-leaf fans with their tips touching and never
think of falling. It is a beautiful iris though not tall.

The color of Zuni is unusual but it is not remarkable nor ex¬
cellent in any other particular.

Tapestry, too, may claim to have “different” color but it is
not distinct nor particularly beautiful.

With the blooming of Cavatina all of Don Quixote was
promptly cast out as in color they are very much alike and Cava¬
tina is superior in every way.

Cinnabar is good. A dependable iris has greater value than is
indicated by the score card. Cinnabar is blessed with that
cpiality in addition to beauty of form, of stem, of color, and of
texture.

Gift is also dependable. It is tail on slender, wiry, graceful
stems. The standards are bright brown with gold over-tone and
the falls are carmine velvet from edge to edge and up into the
haft.

A short stem of Coralie was seen and the color admired.
Depute Nomblot was viewed in the same fashion and considered
interesting — possibly.

Alta California was the best it had ever been seen — on thirty-
six-inch stalks. It is a dull, opaque yellow.

Zaharoon does not have very good form, and substance and
texture are absolutely lacking. It was sent to the mountains.

Aurifero is one of the loveliest of irises. With its tall beauti¬
fully branched stems and beautifully formed flowers of light
bine and gold it will be grown when many of the 1934 introduc¬
tions are in the discard.

[88]

THE FAMILY TREE

■ To anyone who thinks the crossing of two good irises is not
“breeding” I would commend AVebster whose definition reads:
“The act of bearing or producing.” Those who still prefer to call
a multiplicity of crosses preceeding the production of a good
iris “breeding” can usually find a record of some of the grand¬
parents and perhaps great-grandparents. (If growers were more
careful of their records and were willing to divulge them this
would more often be possible.) That the one who produces the
good iris should also have produced all its ancestors is as ridicu¬
lous as it would be for a scientist to sit in his mother’s kitchen
and watch the teakettle boil or lie on the ground in the orchard
and see an apple fall.

It was my privilege and joy this season to help with the re¬
cording of some two hundred seedlings at AVJiitehill which are
to be saved for further observation. One fourth of these were
yellow seifs and most of the others vellow blends.

The production of yellows at AVhitehill began in 1932 when
Dykes pollenated by Aurifero produced Lady Paramount ; and
Dykes pollenated by Mirasol produced Son Robert and Brother
of Bob. This last bloomed from the tips of all four of its
rhizomes and died, but children from its pollen were blooming
this vear. I am mentioning these irises at this time because thev
are largely responsible for the crop of 1934 yellows.

In the ancestry of Lady Paramount one finds that the male
parent, Aurifero, is descended from Marian Mohr crossed by an
unknown, crossed by Sherbert. Judging from the height of
Aurifero and the fact that it does not perform well in the east
I would venture that its unknown grandsire was mes op ot arnica.
But it is possible that its height and climatic preferences came
from an early ancestor for there is really quite a good deal of
“breeding” in this line. Marian Mohr is the result of a cross
of Aliss AVillmott X Carthusian and Miss AVillmott was produced
by Sir Alicbael Foster at Shelf ord from cypriana and Kashmir-
iana. Carthusian also carries that eastern blood for it resulted
from a cross of Dalmatica X Ricarcli. Here we have about reached
the end, or perhaps one should say the beginning, for both Dal¬
matica and ricardi are collected forms of iris as are also cypriana
and Kashmiriana.

On the Sherbert line we do not get much satisfaction as it comes
from Caterina X Mrs. Horace Darwin, both produced by Foster.
Caterina has cypriana for one parent so here is another injection
of that eastern strain.

Of the female line of Lady Paramount I know nothing. I have
heard rumors that Shekinah was used in the production of W. R.
Dykes and recently other rumors have intimated that Moonlight
was one of its parents. This is hard to believe as not one of the.
hundreds of Dykes descendants that have come under my obser¬
vation have shown the least resemblance to the pronounced form
of Moonlight. It is pointed out that one can see flecks in the
falls of Moonlight. These flecks wherever they appear, are the
inheritance of a variegata parent and as all our yellows must
come originally from variegatas the natural conclusion is that
yellows from whatever source or wherever produced may at
times show these traces of the dark fall. The fact that Moon¬
light has them and also W. R. Dykes does not prove relationship
to each other except through the variegata factor.

So far, in Southern California, Lady Paramount has not shown
this tendency but reports from Berkeley say that there the falls
were flecked. Son Robert, inheriting variegata from both parents
has since its first blooming been considerably marked even in its
home garden. Its pollen parent, Mirasol, came from the cross¬
ing of two of the Mitchell seedlings ; one, Shekinah X Argentina,
the other Mme. Neubronner X Marian Mohr. There is also some
"breeding’7 in this line for Shekinah was Hope selfed and Hope
was a child of (Pallida X Aurea) X Celeste. The yellow iris in
this trio was aurea and it was produced in 1830 by Jacques but
its antecedents and those of Mrs. Neubronner are wrapped in
mystery.

Among this year 7s good yellow seedlings were :

One from Dykes X Mme. Cheri. There were several yellows of
this cross but only one was considered worthy of being recorded.
Its stalk was tall and high branched, the hafts broad and falls
flaring. Standards were Citron yellow and falls, Wax yellow.

Vishnu X “a yellow77 (this was either Mirasol or Dykes)
proved to be an interesting cross. Fourteen of these seedlings
were saved for further observation. The form and veinings of
Vishnu was dominant in most of the seedlings but one was a pure
yellow self even to the styles and the hairs of the beard and an¬
other with thick magnolia-like texture and broad petals, was

[90]

Pale Chalcedony Yellow and a third with the same remarkable
substance and texture and broad flaring falls was the bright
Lemon Yellow, a self, with deeper veins over the blade of the
fall. These seedlings were about thirty inches tall. It is with
difficulty that I refrain from telling of the copper tinted iris and
the salmon tinted iris that came from this cross.

Doxa X 3M61 (a tall Mitchell yellow) brought seedlings of
dwarf stature with broad flaring falls. One pale yellow was
reserved.

Son Robert X TJrmiensis produced nothing but yellows. Five,
ranging in height from thirty-four to thirty-eight inches were
kept for another year. Two of them showed evidences of their
oncocyclus parent in the cockled surface and puckered edges of
the standards. The colors were clear and luminous. An Amber
yellow self and a Wax yellow self were the deepest shades.

Druid X Alta California did not produce the tallest stems but
the yellows were dark. One which was difficult to Ridgeway had
deeper — than Wax yellow standards with still darker falls. An¬
other of this cross had Lemon yellow standards and Lemon
chrome falls — two of the brightest yellows in Ridgeway.

Picador X Lady Paramount. All of the petals of No. 1 of this
cross measured three inches by three inches. Very broad hafts and
flaring falls decorated the Pinard Yellow seedling. No. 2 was an¬
other huge flower in light yellow. There were three other good
yellows of this cross of deeper and brighter tones but not so large.
The stems varied in height from thirty inches to fifty inches.

The characteristic of the Sequoiah X Son Robert seedlings were
their broad hafts and petals. The stems showed different types
of branching and they were medium in height up to forty inches.
The yellows were pale in tone.

Dykes X Druid was a combination that yielded plants with
very tall stems and many of them. The notes read: “No. 2.
Picric yellow self — three stems forty-nine inches tall. Flower
five by five.” “No. 3. Five stems 48 inches high on this seedling
which was set out only last May. Six buds besides three flowers in
sight on one stalk. Lovely poise and form. Clear color.” “No. 4.
Intense deep yellow, forty inches tall. Broad hafts and petals.”
“No. 6. Five tall widelv branched stems. Flowers and stem well
balanced. A bright yellow. No. 10, and 11, were tall and large
but not so deep in color. No. 12 was Amber yellow on a fifty-
two-inch stem and No. 14 was a light yellow.

[91]

Son Robert X Dauntless produced a pale creamy yellow with
bright veins and beard ; and a seedling in Lemon chrome. This
last iris apparently had white veins in the haft. I noticed this
distinctive feature in several of the rich yellows. The color of the
fall was carried up into the haft but a tracery of veins was
left without pigment hence white veins. It was very attractive.
I think not one of these seedlings listed had brown veins in the
haft.

Mad. Durrand X Brother of Bob gave a lovely pale yellow on
a tall widely branched stem.

Dolly Madison X Dykes. The only yellow seedling was of
Dolly Madison type and size. A Primrose yellow self.

Gold Top X Brother of Bob was responsible for one of the best
bright yellows in the garden. There were three, well branched,
forty-six-inch stems and the flower was five by five. It was
a rich Lemon chrome self. Two other fine yellows resulted from
this cross — they were Citron yellow,,

Gold Top X Mirasol produced nice yellows on stems up to
thirty-six inches. One was Lemon chrome, another Wax yellow,
and a third, Strontian yellow. All of these colors are the brightest
in their particular column in Ridgeway. Gold Top looks interest¬
ing as a parent of yellows.

Dauntless X Mirasol gave irises not tall or large but having
lovely form. One was Amber yellow even to the hairs of the beard
and another was Citron yellow.

From left to right: Mrs. Lena Lothrop, Mrs. F. F. Williams, Mrs. F. E. Red-
bold, Mrs. C. S. Milliken, Mr. C. G. White, Dr. FL. H. Everett, Mrs. Everett, Mr.
C. S. Milliken, Mr. Robert Schreiner , Mr. F. E. Reibold, Mr. J. N. Giridlian,
Mr. Jesse Nichols, Jr., Commander J. A. Monroe.

THE VOCATIONAL GUIDE

■ Dr. S. Stillman Berry was born in Maine and his childhood
was spent in various parts of the east, and in Montana, Arizona
and California. After graduating from the Redlands High
School he took his undergraduate work at Stanford University
and later received his M.A. degree from Harvard and his Ph.D.
in zoology from Stanford. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa,
Sigma Xi and a Fellow of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science ; he also holds membership in various
American and foreign societies. Dr. Berry has done work for
the Smithsonian Institute and has written on numerous scientific
subjects, is on intimate terms with devilfish, squids and snails,
and has large collections of these specimens. Another of his
hobbies is the collecting of rare books.

Dr. “ Berry’s garden” is a Mecca to which many lovers of
flowers make pilgrimage every year. It is a garden riotous with
colorful blooms among which daffodils and iris predominate but
which contains also a very large variety of other rare and beau¬
tiful plants. His best known irises are Cacique, Mauna Loa and
Acropolis. Dr. Berry’s garden is an expression of his own per¬
sonality and upon it he lavishes his skill and enthusiasm. He
has done much to stimulate amateur gardeners by showing and
explaining his garden to all who are interested. He inspires
others with his passion for flowers and trees and many gardens
bear the mark of his encouragement and example.

Mrs. Jemima Branin. (An interview, February 28, 1934.) Born
in a suburb of Edinburgh, Scotland, August 18, 1845, Mrs.
Branin was brought to America in 1847. At the age of four years
and nine months she was given an iris root. This was the begin¬
ning of her interest in irises.

The next contact was with the Avild irises in West Meadows,
Connecticut. They were in two shades of blue, yellow and white.
From then on every opportunity to get and to grow iris was im¬
proved but there were not many opportunities until she came to
California in 1864. From then until 1881 her iris growing was
that of a busy housewife. In 1881 she and her husband and
children came to San Lorenzo to live, bringing her irises, of
course.

In 1884 she heard of Barr and Sons through an English
friend and sent to them for iris roots, and continued to import
them at from 2 y2 pence up to 6 pence each. These came by
sample post packed two in a box.

The first society of flower growers that she belonged to was
the California State Floral Society which granted her the gold
medal offered by the Cox Seed Company of San Francisco for
the best iris collection at the 1902 Flower Show. This was the
first gold medal given for iris in the world. Mrs. Branin ’s
collection was composed of 45 named and 2 unnamed varieties.

She sowed iris seed for the first time about 1887. After this
she was continually trying out experiments in cross fertilization.
Her first named iris was “Maid of the Mist,” the parents of
which were cengialti and “an old blue flag common everywhere
and name unknown.”

[94]

About 1887 she began raising spurias from seed. She first used
ochroleuca pollinated by itself and got several variations, .some
of them being improvements on ochroleuca. Next Monnieri , self-
pollinated brought a variety of yellow spurias ; California, a light
yellow ; Golden Gate, a large deep yellow ; Golden State, a large
deep yellow with ruffled petals, and Rose Colby with still larger
flowers but not quite so tall. Monnieri crossed by ochroleuca
brought Alice Eastwood and Elizabeth Teubert which is on the
same order as Alice Eastwood but deeper color. Mrs. Mary
Nugent also came from this cross. It is a deep yellow. A. J. Bal¬
four crossed by a spuria brought Nellie Stuart a pale blue with
orange spot.

Mrs. Branin’s work has never been commercialized. She al¬
ways gave to her friends. In a very few instances she sold roots to
strangers.

Today, growing in the Royal Horticultural Gardens in Eng¬
land are Alice Eastwood, Golden Gate, Golden State, Rose Colby,
and Nellie Stuart. The gardener reports them as doing well and
adds. ‘ ‘Whatever they win, I will send to you.”

I was interested to learn that she gave to Mr. Mohr his first
yellow iris.

Besides the gold medal, Mrs. Branin has won eight silver
medals with her flowers at various flower shows. Three of them
were awarded to irises.

Mrs. Jennett Dean possessed a natural love of flowers which
was cultivated by the grandmother with gifts of seed from her
own old-fashioned garden.

About 1892 there came into the young woman’s hands a book¬
let, “ Hardy Flowers Worthy of Culture,” issued by the B. A.
Elliott Company of Pittsburgh. It contained a longer list of
“ German irises” than she supposed existed. Mad. Chereau,
Queen of May, and Crimson King were purchased and when
she came to California two years later the irises came with her
for she hoped, in coming to this “land of flowers,” that she
might have a garden here.

Through a friend in Ventura she met Mr. Dean, the horticul¬
turist then in charge of growing trees and plants for Los Angeles
city parks. Mr. Dean owned acreage in Moneta, a little place
between Los Angeles and the ocean, and here they made their

[95]

home — her dream of a garden come true. Queen of May, Mad.
Chereau, and Crimson King were planted and as they increased
the roots were sold to the Germain Seed Store at $1.50 per
hundred !

In 1907 there appeared in The Florist Exchange a paper,
“ Notes on the Iris” by J. Woodward Manning which had been
read before the Massachusetts Horticultural Society. This article
had a deep influence on Mrs. Deans’ later life. She wrote to Mr.
Manning to learn where she could obtain some of the varieties he
mentioned and he gave her addresses of growers in England,
Holland and Italy. She imported irises. She procured “The
Book of the Iris” by Mr. Lynch which was not only read but
studied. About this time Mr. Farr began to advertise and she
bought from him and from Mr. Harrison of Nebraska, and Mr.
Peterson of Chicago, and from Miss Sturtevant. She had more
than three varieties now and the Moneta home became The Dean
Iris Garden with a little price-list which was first issued about
1910.

Other growers were raising seedlings so she too began to breed

irises. The chickens got into her first seedling bed and scratched

out the labels which was particularly unfortunate as it was from

this batch of seedlings that San Gabriel came. But Mrs. Dean

is sure that Crimson King was one of the parents and meso-

potamica must have been the other. Lady Lou, J. J. Dean, and

Margery were among the pretty seedlings from her garden but

her masterpiece, San Gabriel, overshadows them all and most

others as well. It was introduced in 1921 and thirteen years

later is still unsurpassed in its class.

Before Louisiana irises were so well known Mrs. Dean procured
stocks from New Orleans and in crossing hexagona types with
fulva she produced pinks, mahogany reds, and many shades of
brown. She crossed the spurias and brought out Golden Nugget
and other outstanding seedlings yet to be introduced.

It is more than eight years since Mr. Milliken bought the
Dean Iris Garden, and four years since Mr. Dean passed away.
Recently the home in Moneta where for thirty-seven years Mrs.
Dean had lived and grown irises was sold. She now lives, without
a scrap of a garden, in Los Angeles where she is near her sister.

I have often thought with what ecstacv Mrs. Dean must have
looked on that first bloom of San Gabriel but she writes me that

[ sc ]

‘ 1 The greatest thrill I have had from San Gabriel came about a
year ago when we accepted an invitation to go to Pasadena to
listen to an oratorio. What was my surprise to see the beautiful
church decorated with flowering almond and San Gabriel irises.
Somehow I felt they belonged to the service — they stood up so
tall and beautiful in a row as though they were a part of the
singers in the bank of almond blossoms.” And in response to
what I had written to her regarding San Gabriel she writes : I
am glad to think it may continue to give pleasure to those who
appreciate that kind of beauty- — just sheer loveliness.

Prof. E. 0. Essig is notable in his profession. In Who’s Who
I learn he was born in Indiana and that he received both Bachelor
and Master degrees from Pomona College in California. There
is also an account of his steady and rapid rise to his present posi¬
tion which is Professor of Entomology and Entomologist in the
Experiment Station, College of Agriculture, University of Cali¬
fornia — a position he has held for a number of years.

He is a member of Sigma Xi, Phi Sigma, Alpha Gamma Rho,
Alpha Zeta, also of numerous societies and associations pertain¬
ing to entomology and has written three books: “ Injurious and
Beneficial Insects of California” (two editions), published by the
State Department of Agriculture; “ Insects of Western North
America,” published by Macmillan Company; and “A History of
Entomology, ” published by Macmillan Company. These books
are used b}^ farmers and as text books for Colleges and Uni¬
versities.

Prof. Essig is President of the American Fuchsia Society and
Regional Vice President of the A. I. S.

In 1923 he began hybridizing irises with more than three hun¬
dred named varieties in his collection. Out of the crosses made
those first years came Pacific, California Blue, Pink Lass, Rosul-
tra, Stipples, Uncle Remus, Firefall, Western Skies, Sundew,
Rose Mitchell, and Modoc — a remarkable record. As he had no
commercial aims none were introduced until Mr. Milliken got
permission to catalogue eight of them in 1929, the others were
brought out the following year. In spite of the flood of irises
that have been introduced since then many of these are still out¬
standing in their classes. As Prof. Essig advanced in his profes¬
sion so he has progressed in iris breeding and we now have

[97]

Tenaya, and Ukiali, Sierra Blue and Pale Moonlight, New Al¬
bion and Easter Morn besides others as fine.

The charming, little Essig Garden is laid out on the steep hill¬
side above Berkeley overlooking the beautiful Bay. In the garden
are irregular terraces, winding paths, a small out-door living-
room perched half way, beguiling steps and at the bottom a tiny
pool and a bit of lawn. Ukiali grew tall and rich on a high shelf
near the northern boundary, Western Skies on a narrow terrace
to the south-west where one could look from it to the western
skies. Near by was a good unintroduced “pink.” Mourning
Cloak occupied a pocket close to the house and the stately Sierra
Blue had its place in the center of the garden. Plants of all
kinds placed close together thrive. Injurious insects, no doubt,
make haste to leave when thev learn who is the master here.

The iris seedlings are grown on a vacant lot across the street.
They are hardly allowed to finish blooming before they are dug
and the ground refitted for the next crop. There is no end to this
game and from good Prof. Essig goes on to better.

Lena M. Lothrop was born of a garden-loving Congregational
minister and a mother who wrote. That is her pedigree. She
is tall and has two branches — -both daughters. Her standards
and her falls have been many and her styles variable.

She was born with an iris complex, always being partial to
iris designs even the stilted fleur cle Us. It was not until the
daughters were out of the home that there was an opportunity
for her to have a garden. I dislike to remember how ignorant
she was. Her father had bought seed of Burpee, so she sent for
that catalogue. She ordered six of the eight irises listed. She
determined to have a complete collection — all the varieties there
were ! In a package of tulip bulbs she had ordered was a slip
which read “Subscribe for the Flower Grower.” Now this was
her first knowledge of a periodical entirely devoted to flowers,
so she took the advice on the slip and subscribed.

Not long after there appeared in the Flower Grower a series
of three charmingly written articles on irises and signed by S.
S. Berry, Redlands. Mrs. Lothrop asked every one, “Do you
know anyone in Redlands by the name of Berry?” No one did.
It was important, as he had described irises such as she had
never dreamed and they were illustrated. She began to have
doubts of being able to have a complete collection.

The fame of the Redlands flower show had spread abroad
and Mrs. Lothrop determined to attend tho she did not know
how she would get there, as she did not in those days drive and
her husband used the car daily. Then fate threw her down
and picked her up. With her physician she was driving to the
Loma Linda Hospital early one morning (it was April the 15th)
for an operation. As they came on the grounds of the sani¬
tarium and hospital she noticed handbills tacked to the trees
advertising the Redlands Flower Show. “ There, ” she thought,
“I am missing that again.” Strange as it may seem there had
been a misunderstanding and the surgeon had gone to Los
Angeles so she wTas advised to remain at the sanitarium until
the next day and then go to the hospital. At luncheon in the
dining-room it was announced that cars would be waiting out¬
side to take anyone who wished to go to the Redlands Flower
Show ! Of course she went. There were in the car three men
and one woman beside. She told the woman all about the article
in the Flower Grower and S. S. Berry and how much she wanted
to meet him.

Such irises as she saw that day! I doubt if they have ever
seemed quite so gorgeous since. On one side of the tent were
ever so many irises exhibited by a Meda Hinckley, and on the
other side in the open class wrere just as many exhibited by one
C. G. White. But there was not a sign of S. S. Berry until in
the back of the room the woman companion spied a man set¬
ting up a commercial exhibit of irises. “Perhaps that is Mr.
Berry, ask him,” she urged. So they approached and asked and
he smiled and cupped his hand behind his ear and she faltered,
“Did you write some articles for the Flower Grower?” “I
have done such things,” he answered.

Later on in the hospital she lay plotting and planning how
she could get to the Berry garden, when one of her visitors,
who drove a little old “Model T Coop,” promised that as soon
as she was able to go she would take her — and she did, more
than once. When Mrs. Lothrop learned that the Berrys came
from Maine she was able to prevail on her husband to go with
her, as he, too, came from Maine, and these Maine-ites — they
are sort of set apart, you know, but she did not care if she was
not of the elect if only she could get to the iris garden !

[09]

All the rest has been comparatively easy for she became a
member of the A. I. S. She had the eastern officers quite
alarmed when she received four Id. M.’s in one year, but that was
just a stroke of “beginner’s luck.”

Mr. C. S. Milliken. I have known Mr. Milliken for vears.
When we have met we have talked on the most interesting topics
in the world — irises. What did it matter where we had lived or
what we had done, time was flying and we had to consider what
might be the effect of Camelliard pollen on Purissima. Would it
produce a pure yellow? Then there were those other crosses and
that new iris we had seen or heard about. There was also possi¬
bly a bit of gossip about iris-folk and their reaction to certain
irises — all very important — so much so that when I had to write
some of these “biographies” of our illustrious breeders I found
I did not know a thing about C. S. Milliken except that in days
gone by he had left “Boston Tech” with a diploma.

Abashed by my ignorance I took Donald aside and questioned
him privately but when I had finished he said “You would better
ask father, I may not be right.”

Meeting his father in Mr. White’s garden I remarked that I
was writing the history of his life ( !) and needed corroboration
of data received from Donald but he did not register the least
interest. I began to quiz: “You taught in Michigan after grad¬
uating from Boston Tech?” Meekly came the response “Yes.”
“Then you taught at Rippon College in Wisconsin?” Another
meek “Yes.” “You then came to Pasadena and occupied the
chair of biology at Caltech?” He came to life. “It was not Cal¬
tech then it was Throop Institute of Technology.” (He spelled
“Throop” for me) “But you were there two years?” I persisted.
“Yes, it is true,” he said resignedly — he was getting restless.
Mr. White’s seedlings were much more interesting to him than my
story of his life! He was moving away — I called after him, “You
were associated with the University of California in its Citrus
Experiment Station at Riverside?” Another “Yes” was thrown
to me over his shoulder and quickly and louder I called: “And
since then?” Beyond several rows of seedlings came the answer.
“Since then I have been with the California Fruit Growers
Exchange,” and he was gone.

In 1925 he bought from Mrs. Dean her stock of irises and thus

[100]

began the Southern California Iris Gardens. Very shortly there¬
after he acquired the habit of carrying pollen which has grown
on him until one might say that he is a confirmed iris breeder.
Red Flare came into being with its bright unusual color, and a
fine dark blue, Royal Salute, is being introduced this year. It is
a giant Gaudichau, being a cross of that lady on California Blue.

Mr. Milliken has made such a wide variety of matings that
one can find in his seedling beds an array of every known and
unknown shade of iris color with form and stems in all their
varied ramifications. He was for keeping them all for how other¬
wise could he know what were their parental possibilities ! There
are many fine seedlings among them, many which you and I will
want to grow. Mr. Milliken is conservative and we can be sure
that when a Milliken iris is introduced it has been grown in
his garden several years and has proven to be good and out¬
standing.

He is deeply in love with irises and more deeply in love with
creating them. At any time he can pull out of his pocket the little
book which contains the records of his crosses and while away the
tedium of a waiting hour in seeing visions of beautiful irises to
come.

Two years ago the son, Donald, took over the iris business.
Donald and I were planning for the ratings of 1934. “ Father do
any rating?” he queried with raised eyebrows, “But he prom¬
ised!” I protested. “Then you will have to take away his twee¬
zers,” flatly declared the young man.

Sydney B. Mitchell. Sydney B. Mitchell was born in Mon-
treal, Canada, and received both B. A. and M. A. degrees from
the McGill University. He studied librarianship in 1903-04 at
the Xew York Library School in Albany. In 1908 he became
associated with the Stanford Library, and in 1911 he went to
the University of California, where he has since remained except
for the vear he was loaned to the University of Michigan and
the year that Professor and Mrs. Mitchell spent abroad.

Mr. Mitchell is now Professor of Librarianship and Director
of the School of Librarianship, University of California. His
name appears in Who’s Who in America.

Prof. Mitchell became interested in iris growing when a
student at McGill and brought to California in 1908 his large
collection of the best varieties of that date, imported largely

[101]

from England. Becoming acquainted with Mr. Mohr, he took a
great interest in the latter’s iris breeding and introduced his
earlier seedlings.

After Mr. Mohr’s sudden death Prof. Mitchell took over the
Mohr breeding records and seedlings and carried on the experi¬
ments planned jointly by Mr. Mohr and himself. We all know
that to this day Prof. Mitchell is, by combining the names
(Mohr-Mitchell), continually giving credit for the early work
in breeding done by Mr. Mohr.

Just now Prof. Mitchell is succeeding in giving us large
yellows, both with and without the use of W. R. Dykes, and as
a by-product he is producing some beautiful blends.

In 1927 the Dykes Medal was awarded him for the first of
his series of giant plicatas, San Francisco. Many of the finest
irises in California gardens are the result of his work. Among
them are Aurifero, Purissima, San Francisco, San Diego, Los
Angeles, Rubeo, Mirasol, Natividad, Alta California, California
Gold and Sunol. How bare would be our gardens without
them.

All of us who read garden literature have been charmed and
benefited by the writings of Sydney Mitchell. ‘ 1 Gardening in
California,” published in 1923, is still kept close at hand for
ready reference. “Adventure in Flower Gardening” was pub¬
lished five years later, and the fascinating story of his own gar¬
den, “From a Sunset Garden,” was new in 1933. Recently
there have appeared in a California magazine a series of articles
on the trials of a Sunset Gardener, and also interestingly writ¬
ten individual articles on different garden topics from his facile
pen. They are instructive and delightful reading.

Wm. Mohr. Mr. William Mohr began breeding irises about
1913. In 1923 he and his wife were killed in an automobile
accident. Although the standards by which we gauge irises has
changed greatly in the last ten years we are still growing many
of his seedlings. In almost every California garden one will
find Santa Barbara, Conquistador, Frieda Mohr and the very
blue Claridad. Ilis pogo-cyclus Wm. Mohr, which was named
for him after his death, has not been excelled by any other pro¬
ducer.

The following sketch of Mr. Mohr has been taken from the

[ 102 ]

article written by Prof. Sidney B. Mitchell and published in
A. I. S. Bulletin, No. 9, October, 1923 :

“William Mohr was born on the ranch on which he spent his
whole life. His father had come from Schleswig-Holstein in
1852 and had bought the land from the old Spanish Castro
family, whose huge rancho antedated the Americans. At the
time of his death he owned 400 acres around Mount Eden, a
little hamlet between the hills and San Francisco Bay.

“Two or three acres around the big ranch house were his
garden, not a show place nor one developed along landscape lines,
but a glorious garden for the plant lover and a fine experimental
ground for hybridizing. Mr. Mohr was 52 at the time of his
death and for 40 years he had been growing flowers, so that
a visit to his ranch at almost any time of year was interesting.

“He had always been fond of raising things from seed . . .
long before he took up irises he had done much crossing of car¬
nations and Lady Washington pelargoniums.

“His work with irises began when he had only a few of the
then cpiite ordinary bearded varieties, but he soon imported
Regelias and Oncocyclus and their hybrids and began work on
them and to improve his strictly bearded irises he got mesopo-
tamica and cypriana and other Asiatic species. For years he
worked away on this flower by himself and during that time
got some quite remarkable results, but with the added stimulus
of letters from Miss Sturtevant, Dr. Berry and others, and
the visits which I, from my close proximity, was able to pay
him, he became more absorbed in this particular flower and at the
time of his death was raising thousands of seedlings in a wider
range than any other hybridizer whose work I know.

“Though without formal scientific training, by reading and
experiment he came to have a real scientific attitude toward his
breeding.

“He was a man of singularly modest character, always un¬
ready to praise his own productions, always unwilling to judge
adversely those of other breeders.

“His feeling that even the best of today’s varieties were to be
superseded by finer ones made him slow to name any of his own
seedlings. If even the finest were not good parents he soon lost
interest in them. It was to the future of his favorite flower
that he always looked.”

[103]

Mr. Carl Salbach is a native son. He was born near Stockton
and there received his education and for eight years served as
deputy county clerk. Since then lie has spent most of his time
as a salesman and as a hybridizer.

He first sold typewriters and was so successful that in less
than a year he was in charge of the Los Angeles office. After
several years he was promoted to the position of manager of the
San Francisco office, where he continued until the company was
merged with another. He then had charge of the Royal Type¬
writer Company’s office in Oakland for seven years — when his
garden claimed him.

For fifteen years he has been growing dahlias, gladiolus and
irises. He produced a number of dahlias which are still being
offered, but he confined most of his effort to breeding gladioli.
Probably his best known gladiolus is Betty Nuthall, which is
being grown by the million for the cut-flower trade. His new
yellow gladiolus, Golden Goddess, has been granted a plant patent.
It is said to out-class anything in its color.

During the last two or three years Mr. Salbach has done con¬
siderable work with irises and has produced some fine ones.
Tioga is one of the best blue-purples and Gold Top is a very
floriferous blended variegata which is proving to be an inter¬
esting parent.

Mr. Salbach became associated with Prof. Mitchell in market¬
ing the originations of Mr. Mohr and the productions of Prof.
Mitchell himself. In this wa}^ some of the best varieties in our
gardens have gone through his hands.

Mr. Salbach has been generous in donating iris roots to be
used as prizes at iris shows. These prizes have often stimulated
the recipient to greater iris interest.

The gardens of Mr. Salbach and Prof. Mitchell lie side by side
on the northern slopes of the hills above Berkeley and, with the
garden of Prof. Essig near by, are a mecca to all iris lovers.

Mr. C. W. White. Mr. White comes from the state of Ohio.
He attended Harvard, spent eleven years raising potatoes in
Florida and another eleven years in Hawaii growing pineapples
before coming to California. In 1915 he bought a lovely home
on the hills above Redlands, where lie has since grown oranges
and his garden.

r 104]

One cannot come into Redlands without seeing every where
evidences of his thoughtful desire to help and to beautify his
home city. Thousands of rose bushes and thousands of iris
roots and other plants have gone into its home gardens by his
gifts to the school children and Mr. and Mrs. White have given
a beautiful prosellis for the little open-air theater which is used
at least once a week for community concerts.

Mr. White became interested in growing irises through the
garden of Dr. Berry. At first it was necessary to visit the Berry
garden often to get the battery of his enthusiasm recharged, then
it became self-charging and last spring it was going so strong
that, when it came time to exchange garden for yacht, he was
loth to leave.

The iris and rose garden, embedded in a fragrant orange
grove, slopes to the north. Below lies the beautiful valley ac¬
cented by giant eucalypti and margined on the horizon by

mountains. It was in this setting that Ladv Paramount came

into being. Above the wide garden gate one reads:

Enter here knowing

That this is a nursery

Of loved plants, honored work,

Simple thoughts, and the
Hopes that dreams are made of.

The true iris ambition of the master of Whitehill is to pro¬
duce for all gardens and garden-lovers dependable, acclimated
irises of oncocyclus form and loveliness. He realizes that not
every one is able to do this experimental work and that unless
it is done soon the oncocvclus irises are doomed. He grows
the species in large numbers, having at the present time more
than seven hundred clumps of oncocyclus and regelia species and
named hybrids. To read their names, sixtv or more, is like
reading a compilation from the check list. Lortetii, Hauronensis,
Sofarana , Hermoine, urmiensis , paradox a, Barnumae , Sylphide,
Polyhymnia, Masia, Persephone and Ewbankiana can be read on
some of the labels. From such parents as these over a thousand
seedlings are growing exceedingly well on their own specially
prepared terrace below the main garden.

Mr. White knows that the introduction of oncocyclus blood
into the pogon irises will bring new forms, new colors and added

[ 105 ]

charm to our garden irises. This has been demonstrated at
Whit eh ill.

He does not take seriously his work among the pogons. That
has been but a pastime when there were no oncocyclus irises to
breed. But with the bearded irises he seems to have been in¬
spired as witness Lady Paramount, Brown Betty, Sweet Alibi,
Fair Enough, Another Day, Somebody and scores of others.

Every garden lover has reason to be thankful that Mr. AVliite
lias the courage of his convictions and that he is pushing on !

Dr. F. F. Williams. Dr. F. F. Williams eame from the most
northern part of New York State, where both people and irises
need to be hardy. He received his degree of B. S. from St.
Lawrence University, in his home town, and his M. D. from
a New York City Medical College. He married the charming
girl who has proven herself to be a sympathetic “iris wife” and
the spice of our Group meetings, and accepted a place on the
staff of the State Hospital at Patton, California. In ten years
he has advanced to the position of Clinical Director in this
institution which cares for nearly four thousand patients.

The Doctor has a natural aptitude for gardening and the
steps of his iris education happened in this way: 1. An attendant
in the hospital gave him a few bulbs of both white and blue
Spanish iris. He did not know what Spanish iris looked like, but
he grew them, and 2. (parried blooms to the Redlands Show,
where they were awarded a blue ribbon and a prize of an iris root
donated by Mr. Salbach. 3. He visited the Berry garden, saAY
Cacique in bloom and was completely and permanently cap¬
tured by the charms of the apogons. Such surrender costs money
and his pocketbook was thinner by five dollars. 4. In Mr. Milli-
ken’s garden fortune favored him. The purchase of a beautiful
white hexagona-like flower was denied him so he bought the blue
form which when it bloomed proved to be the Avhite iris he craved !
5. He joined the A. I. S., bought iris books and the iris numbers
of Addisonia, corresponded with Dr. Small, who sent him seed
and later roots, Avhen collecting in Louisiana.

By this time the Doctor knew something about irises. He
makes a particular study of the requirements of every iris
that comes into his garden, as he does of the patients in his
clinics, and brings about the conditions needed. For those

[ 106 ]

irises which grew so happily in the marshes of Louisiana and the
wet savannahs of Florida little swamps are created, and beds of
muck for the laevigatas. He is repaid by quantities of bloom and
an amazing increase of roots.

One apogon pod usually holds a lot of seed and the doctor
has a small garden so he has produced seed sparingly, but
interestingly. One of his first crosses was versicolor on pseudo-
corns. Pseudacorus has the reputation of producing only pseuda-
corus and it lived up to its reputation but it evidently was a
“take” as the seedlings were dwarf although yellow. Versicolor on
sibirica Emperor gave larger flowers of1 sibirica form, and fulva
on the white hexagona produced a wide variety of lovely irises,
one of these, Laurentia, named in honor of his alma mater, has
been introduced and one of the Emperor seedlings has been
named Lillabell for his mother. Five outstanding new apogon
seedlings bloomed in his garden this year, the most exciting being
a lovely primrose yellow.

The Doctor, who is loved by eveyone who knows him, is hap¬
piest when he is sharing his garden and plants with others.

I 107 ]

TO READ OR NOT TO READ

* The Story of Gardening. By Richardson Wright. Dodd, Mead
& Co. $3.00. Not often is so extensive a compilation of facts pre¬
sented as “easy reading.” The thirteen pages of Bibliography
lead us on to even further study and the almost thirty pages of
Index prove its value as a reference. It is, however, the approach
to the subject that makes the volume of unique value. Perhaps with
his tongue in his cheek, Mr. Wright begins wTith gardening by
women when the nomads first became settlers and he ends with
gardening for (and by) women as expressed in the Garden Club
movement of today. And in between we travel the “Four Great
Gardening Highwaj^s, ” the West Asian, the Hellenic, the Hindu,
and the Chinese to each of which our modern garden owes a
something.

The art of gardening develops with civilization and reflects its
religions, its customs and its other arts. “Gardens and garden
methods indicate eras and marks the evolutions of peoples.”
That we like to associate what wre have with the past, with dis¬
tant climes, and venturesome personalities makes the fascination
of the book. Throughout the ages there have been names of
students, designers, and adventurers in the gardening world and
names of others who loved plants and encouraged these activities
just as there have been warriors, prophets, and statesmen. How
rarely, however, are we given an opportunity to read of their
doings? Mr. Wright clearly considers gardening an essential to
living and he brings us into an appreciation of how peoples in
past epochs agreed with him.

Breadth and simplicity of treatment ; interest ; most fittingly

dedicated to Ernest Henrv Wilson.

My Garden, An Intimate Magazine for Garden Lovers. Edited
by Theo. A. Stephens, 34 Southampton St. Strand, London,
W. C. 2, England. Monthly. $3.00 (12 shillings).

Beginning in January, 1934, with contributions from Sir Wm.
Lawrence, Sir Arthur Llort (our iris friend), Beverley Nichols,
and many others this 150-page booklet of a magazine continues
delightful. It is rather like that scrap-book we always intend to
make with its serious article on Irises on a Chalk Soil, its plan for
a terrace, its bit of poetry, or humorous essay. There are bits of
plant lore such as we find in Horticulture, plant gossip such as
The Gardeners Chronicle still offers us, lovely pictures, and hints
on methods. Altogether, even in these days of deleted subscrip¬
tions, it must find its niche among the garden books.

[108]

OUR BULLETINS

■ Breeding. Six Bulletins. Nos. 16, 19, 22, 33, 43 and 52. $3.00.
An article by C. H. Graham in The Flower Grower has brought
many an inquiry for No. 16, A Report on the Sterility of Irises,
published by Dr. A. B. Stout of The New York Botanical Garden
and in, part, the fruit of scholarships for research offered by our
Society. At present the interest of breeders seems to be centered
on chromosomes (there are to be articles in both July and October,
1934) but thoroughout our history we have published much on
the scientific side of breeding irises. Mr. Bliss (No. 2) and Miss
Sturtevant (No. 3) gave records of fertility. Breeders are always
interested in parentage of varieties and we published the Al¬
phabetical Iris Check List in 1929 ($3.50) and list, each January
newly registered or introduced varieties. Many a breeder also
writes of his successes and of his theories and their failure, while
the more scientific branch out into the general theories of genetics
and their possible application to irises.

In January, 1928, we first listed “Science Series” and have
now reached number 14. Herein you will find contributions on
genetics, soils and fertilizers, entomology, etc., of unique value.
This present set, however, includes the available numbers that
offer notes and articles of especial interest to the breeder.

Checks payable to A. I. S. Send to R. S. Sturtevant, Groton,
Mass.

TID-BITS

■ Likes and Dislikes of the General Public.— From the view¬
point of the professional iris grower. — If I were to pick an iris
that would be ideal from a sales standpoint, the chances are that
I would find myself a long way from my own choice as the
finest iris. The public will choose almost any iris that has both
size and color, regardless of other qualities : form, finish, texture,
and other characteristics, being of minor importance when com¬
pared to these two apparently “vital” factors.

Take, for instance, the popular Magnifica. I have seen many
persons who are quite certain that there is no more beautiful
specimen existing. As a mass in the distance, I cannot help but
be impressed, but as an individual flower, I believe that Magnifica,
with its flappy “elephant ears,” leaves much to be desired.

Proof of the importance of size is the saying “small iris, small

[ 309 ]

price.” Just imagine the introduction of a dwarf iris at $50 a
rhizome — and I think you will see the point.

As to color, Pluie ’d Or is, I believe, an excellent example.
This iris ranked first in the A. I. S. list of the fifty most popular
iris, although many others have better size and habit.

Yellow is probably the best selling color in an iris today, al¬
though a true warm salmon pink might have even more sales
value. The reception that might be accorded a flame or scarlet
red is a thought to be toyed with. Such an iris might be the
best money-maker of the lot. Breeders, however, should take
warning, for it is my understanding that Dr. Harry Everett
owns a well oiled shot-gun that is ready for use on the first man
guilty of producing a scarlet iris. And don’t bank on me to keep
your secret, either, for I have a sneaking suspicion that I might
forward the information direct to the Doctor in Nebraska.

In general, however, one must admit that the public is not well
up on iris — most are unfamiliar with any but the common Kocchi,
Pallida, Albicans, etc. Classic as an example is the tale about the
new yellow “California Gold.” A bloom, given bj^ the originator
to a true iris enthusiast, wras displayed alone in a vase in the
latter’s office. His first customer of the day, on seeing the bloom,
exclaimed, “It’s not true! There isn’t any such iris!” The next
customer remarked, “Pretty yellow iris. I have a lot like it in
my own garden.”

Although slightly off the subject of likes and dislikes of the
general public, no “professional” iris discussion would be com¬
plete without a mention of the common belief that iris “revert”
to the common purple or white varieties. The explanations, of
course, are simple — usually coming from the two facts that the
commoner iris are very early bloomers and most rapid multi¬
pliers. Kochii, for instance, may bloom from a nubbin left in
the ground during transplanting years before. Perhaps, in the
garden next door, Albicans may bloom ahead of all the other
iris purchased the previous year — and the “reverting” story can
pass through a great many minds before the blooming of the new
varieties will correct the impression.

In conclusion, please note that this article deals only with the
average rather than the more discerning gardener, and certainly
not with the reactions of the iris enthusiast.

Carl Salbacii, California.

1 no]

■ From a Maryland Garden.

No matter how much we admire the Bearded Irises, we must
admit that they are a bit heavy when planted in masses and need
smaller flowers to relieve them of their heaviness. No type plant
is more useful for this purpose than the easy growing rock plants ;
they are feathery in appearance, their colors blend well with the
Irises and they bloom at just the right time. Used as edging plants
they give the garden charm and should be grown a great deal more
than they are. The beauty of arabis, Alyssum saxatile and aubrie-
tia. is enhanced by Iris Nymph, Florentina and a,purple interme¬
diate. A little later come many more of these rock plants that are
so easy to grow and to place. Saponaria ocymoides, Gypsophila
re pens, all the pinks and low growing veronicas, Nepeta mussini ,
creeping hypericums, Cerastium tometosum and iberis. All these
thrive under the same conditions as do the Irises. For taller plants
there are Heuchera Rosamond, aquilegia and hesperis. I dislike
the hesperis but a plant or two are sometimes useful in an Iris gar¬
den. In England Lupines, which grow so marvelously there, are
used, but they are large and stiff and make the planting heavier
than ever. Baptism australis is good.

Those who are seeing artistic effect should not plant too many
Irises together and I do not think they should be allowed to grow
into very large clumps as they sometimes do. I prefer being just
a plain fan and planting mine in the cutting garden with just a
few favorites (which are always changing) around the house.

Last summer I saw a number of new Irises and some which were
only new to me, a few of them intrigued me very much. I do not
like a variegata, but I did succumb to Crown Prince, which is yel¬
low and brownish red. Edgewood is a very large pink bicolor and
it has height. Blue Banner is a beauty. I cannot understand why
the medal was awarded to San Francisco and not to Los Angeles,
which is so much more lovely. Pale Moonlight, an exquisite pale
blue, Raineses, a free blooming variety with pink and yellow tones,
Sitka, a fine white and Gloriole, which I have kept for the last.
I almost believe it is the most beautiful of all Irises. It is a large,
well-formed white, tall enough to carry well its big blooms. It
glistens in the sun as though covered with frost. I have read de¬
scriptions of it, giving its color a very pale blue, but the one 1 saw
was white. May the gods of gardens soon lower it within reach
of my eager hands !

Ellen George Love.

[ill]

■ Iris in Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Klamath County is a new dot on the Iris map of members of the
American Iris Society. Although there are many splendid Iris
gardens in Oregon, I believe eastern Oregon is not represented. It
seems to me that we have quite the ideal Iris land. We lack the
rainfall of the western parts, being in semi-arid country. Our
elevation, 4,100 feet, gives us decided seasons — often zero weather,
late frosts, but very dry, and often hot summers. The soil is vol¬
canic ash, mostly all on slopes, giving very good drainage. Why
have wre not a perfect spot in which to raise Iris ? Only the very
early flowering varieties are often frozen by our usual May frosts
after a storm.

In reply to some questions you ask in the January Bulletin :
About the only trouble we have is root-rot and, as I said, early
May frosts, which do not harm the later varieties ; in fact, only the
very earlv are killed.

I am a comparatively new grower of better varieties. Only the
last two years have I bought good ones. At first I felt I wanted
many varieties, but 1 feel more and more that I wish only good
ones. I want the effect in the garden and the cut flowers. My
garden is on a very sloping piece of land and I have planted the
parking, 100 feet depth of lot, in iris. It is too steep and rocky
for grass. When the plants increase, I shall try some special color
arrangement. At present, just anything and everything is there,
with no plan. In the garden proper I have tried to blend browns
and pinks, with here and there yellow — in another part blues and
purples.

I think iris quite the loveliest flower I know and grow it for that
reason. There is the most wonderful thrill in just looking at a
vase with certain color combinations. I believe I enjoy the cut
flowers quite the most, although the clump in the garden, with cer¬
tain light shades, is as thrilling. A Princess Beatrice under a pink
hawthorn tree is marvelous, with pink and blue columbine close
by. I believe I enjoy the old as well as the new until the new
prove more enjoyable. The old yellow Flavescens could never be
discarded. I put it every place.

Then, too, I must admit that I enjoy actual gardening, digging,
transplanting, watching the increase, and then hoping for some¬
thing different from my seedlings. At present, January, I am
stepping on all the poor heaved up rhizomes washed out by rains
and frosts.

[112]

With us, the Darwin tulips, which are planted in the shade,
bloom at the same time as iris, and spirea, too, is in bloom, making
gorgeous, big, mixed bouquets possible.

Of course, I am anxious to see our “ god-child ” Klamath blos¬
som here. I have planted it only this last summer. My better
irises are so new I am unable to tell which I like best, and as yet
have not been to a real iris show or to any growers’ gardens in
blooming time. Those that have been groAving here for some years,
are the old Prospero, Ambassadeur, Williamson and others of that
generation. A friend has Lady Poster, which is a beautiful clump ;
another has beautiful Mother of Pearl.

We have had two iris shows but are too amateurish to properly

display what we grow, and very few people have large quantities
which they can show. I have about one hundred and fifty varieties,
which are classed by Mr. Schreiner as Dupes, or Class I, and in ’36
hope to be able to say more about them.

Nan M. Krause.

[113]

COMMERCIAL DIRECTORY

D. M. ANDREWS

Iris: Gilead, Rusty Gold and
Other Indispensables

BOULDER COLORADO

CHERRY HILL NURSERIES

Thurlow and Strangers, Inc.

Fine Peonies, Iris, Phlox and
Perennials

WEST NEWBURY MASS.

FAIRMOUNT IRIS
CARDENS

Rare Bearded and Beardless Iris
New Hemerocallis and Poppies

LOWELL, MASSACHUSETTS

FILLMORE CARDENS

FINE IRIS AND PEONIES
MRS. MABEL WERNIMONT

OHIOWA NEBRASKA

MELVIN C. GEISER
IRIS

Peonies and Tulips
Fair Chance Farm

BELOIT KANSAS

GLEN ROAD IRIS
CARDENS

Miss Grace Sturtevant

Outstanding Novelties

Standard Varieties

WELLESLEY FARMS MASS.

HEARTHSTONE IRIS
CARDENS

M. Berry Doub
Fine Iris Growers

Introducing "Hearthstone Copper”
HAGERSTOWN MD.

HILL IRIS AND PEONY
FARM

The Best in Irises

Our Specialty: Reliable Fall Bloomers
LAFONTAINE KANSAS

THE IRIS CARDEN

SELECTED BEARDED
IRIS

OVERLAND PARK KANSAS

LONCFIELD IRIS FARM

Williamson Originations
Best Bearded Varieties and Species

BLUFFTON, INDIANA

C. S. MILLIKEN

SUNNYSIDE CARDENS

Southern California Iris Gardens

Introducers of Easter Morn, Lady
Paramount, Sierra Blue and Others

970 New York Ave.
PASADENA CALIF.

L. Merton Gage

New and Standard Varieties of Iris

NATICK - MASSACHUSETTS

NORTHBROOK CARDENS,
INC.

Peonies and Iris

THE TINGLE NURSERY
CO.

Azaleas, Boxwood, Magnolias and

World’s Best Varieties

Other Choice Plants

Dundee Road Northbrook, Ill.

Tel. Northbrook 160

PITTSVILLE MARYLAND

OVER-the-GARDEN-WALL

Recent Bearded Iris

Various Species

60 N. Main Street

UPTON CARDENS

(Mrs. G. N. Marriage)

IRIS— New Hybrids
ALPINES — From Colorado Rockies

WEST HARTFORD CONN.

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO.

ROYAL IRIS CARDENS

TREHOLME CARDENS

Louisiana and Other Species

New Rare and Good Old Irises
Peonies of Distinction

Finest Bearded Iris

Earl Woodell Sheets, Owner

CAMILLUS N. Y.

1831 Lamont Street, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D. C.

QUALITY GARDENS

C. F. WASSENBERC

Owned by Mrs. Douglas Pattison

Iris and Peonies

Newest , Rarest and Finest Iris

Largest Collection in the Central
West

FREEPORT ILLINOIS

VAN WERT OHIO

CARL SALBACH

ROBERT WAYMAN

Introducer of Mitchell Iris

Also Dahlias, Gladiolus, and Seeds

657 Woodmont Avenue
BERKELEY CALIF.

IRISES

The Best of All Types

BAYSIDE, LONG ISLAND, N. Y.

JACOB SASS - SASS IRIS

Maple Road Gardens

IS THIS YOUR

Route 7, Benson Station

SPACE?

OMAHA

NEBRASKA

THE AMERICAN
HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY

INVITES to membership ail persons who are seriously inter¬
ested in horticulture. For its members it publishes an illus¬
trated quarterly, The National Fdorticultural Magazine in which
will be found a more diverse and interesting collection of horti¬
cultural material than in any other American garden publication.
It was written by and for its members. Among its regular features
are articles on: Conifers, California plants, American natives, iris
species, narcissus, succulents, lilies, unusual shrubs and trees, rock
plants, ivies, and many more. Particular features for 1934 will
include a horticultural review of fuchsias and preliminary reports
on tulip species. Membership is three dollars the year. Checks
should be made to the Society and sent to Mr. C. C. Thomas,
211 Spruce Street, Takoma Park, Washington, D. C.

IRISES

KATISHA, STANWIX —

INTRODUCTIONS FOR 1933

Fairylea (1933), Guyasuta (1931),
Edgewood, Elsinore, Lodestar, Sere¬
nade and other varieties.

Descriptive list on request.

C. H. HALL, Ingomar, Pa.

J. MARION SHULL

Artist, Plant Breeder, Specializing in

Iris

207 Raymond Street Chevy Chase, Md.

Productions include Coppersmith, Dune
Sprite, Elaine, Julia Marlowe, L’Aiglon,
Moon Magic, Morning Splendor, Nocturne,
Phosphor, Sequoiah, Sylvia Lent, Tropic
Seas, Waterfall.

Author, “Rainbow Fragments, A Garden
Itook of the Iris.” Price $3.50

Robert Wayman’s
IRISES

1,200 Varieties
Hundreds of Rare Irises
Write for free planting list.

ROBERT WAYMAN

Box 26

Bayside, Long Island, N. Y.

FINE IRISES

Send for latest prices

WINNESHIEK -o ur striking new, velvety
blue-purple. Large — dark — clear cc-lor — each $2.00.

LEO J. EGELBERG

144 S. 6th St. La Crosse, Wis.

-WANTED-

TWO (2) COPIES OF BULLETIN NO. 50,
JANUARY, 1934

$1 each paid for first two offered to the
Acting Secretary

JOHN H. FERGUSON

1918 Harford Avenue Baltimore. Maryland

PROFITABLE PEONIES

Only best of old and new varieties, at attractive
prices. Fine quality roots, liberally graded. Our
catalog names best commercial cut-flower varieties
and gives \aluable planting and growing instruc¬
tions.

HARMEL PEONY COMPANY
Growers of Fine Peonies Since 1911
BERLIN, MARYLAND

THE AMERICAN ROSE SOCIETY

INVITES

MEMBERS of the American Iris Society who also enjoy roses to
unite with it in improving and furthering the enjoyment of
roses throughout the world.

The American Rose Annual, sent to each member every year,
describes all the new roses and is packed with information and in¬
spiration for rose growers. <\

The American Rose Quarterly deals with current exhibitions,
meetings, rose pilgrimages, roster of members, etc.

"What Every Rose Grower Should Know,” the Society’s book
of instructions for rose-growing, is sent to each member.

The Committee of Consulting Rosarians will give free advice on
all rose subjects.

Dues $3.50 per Year; Three Years for $10.00

Address

SECRETARY, AMERICAN ROSE SOCIETY

Harrisburg, Penna.

SPECIAL NOTICE

Th is manual is the greatest book, of „ its kind and will
prove of great value to any peony admirer. Membership
in the American Peony Society, four splendid bulletins,
together with the peony manual for $6.00.

Act quick if you desire a manual as at this low price
we expect to soon dispose of the balance of books on hand.
Address all communications and remittances to:

W. F. Christman, Secretary ,

American Peony Society,

Northbrook, Ill.

The American Iris Society

♦

/ / LTHOUGH ALL READERS of the BULLETIN are
supposed to know that the annual dues of the
Society are three dollars payable by the cal¬
endar year, it has been called to our attention
that there is a chance that someone who is not
a member may read your copy and wonder
how he too may become a subscriber. It is for
that reader that this last page has been added.
If you happen to be such a reader, let us
assure you that the Society welcomes to mem¬
bership all persons who are interested in iris
who feel that special knowledge of iris would
be welcome in their gardening.

BULLETIN

OF THB

American Iris Society

OCTOBER, 1934
DESCRIPTIONS— PART VI
NO. 53

Editor, R. S. STURTEVANT

CONTENTS

Comment and Remark, The Editor . 1

The Quest of The Golden Fleece, Harry TI. Everett . 3

Oregon Irises, Carl and Louise Starker . 11

Distinctive Points in Descriptions, E. S. Sturt evant . 21

Descriptions of Varieties, Part VI, E. S. Sturt evant . 24

Index to Varieties Described . 37

Servant of The Rainbow, Ethel Anson S. Beckham . 44

A Regional Report — 1934, J. Marion Shull . 53

Middle Atlantic Recommends Varieties, M. E. Douglas . 57

Species Notes:

Iris kumaonensis . 70

Iris dichotoma . 75

Iris hucharica . 78

Iris ruthenioa . 79

The Family Tree, C. E. F. Gersdorff . 81

Bearded Irises at Wisley, 1933 . 83

Ask Me Another . 85

Tid-Bits 36th . • . 89

Published Quarterly by

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY, 1918 HARFORD AVE., BALTIMORE, MD.

Entered as second-class matter January, 1934, at the Post Office at Baltimore, Md,,

under the Act of March 3, 1879.

#3.00 the Year — 50 Cents per Copy for Members

Directors :

OFFICERS, 1934

Term

expiring

1934:

Sherman R. Duffy

Mrs. W. 11. Peckham

A. P. Saunders

R. S. Sturtevant

Term

expiring

1935:

Mrs. J. Edgar Hires
B. Y. Morrison

John C. Wister

Term

expiring

1936:

Dr. H. H. Everett

Dr. J. II. Kirkland

J. B. Wallace, Jr.
Richardson Wright

President — John C. Wister, Wister St. and Clarkson Avenue, Germantown,
Philadelphia, Pa.

Vice-President — Dr. H. H. Everett, 1104 Sharp Bldg., Lincoln, Nebr.
Secretary — Mr. John Ferguson, 1918 Harford Ave., Baltimore, Md.

Treasurer — Richardson Wright, House & Garden, Graybar Bldg., New York
City.

Regional Vice-Presidents —

2. Col. J. C. Nicholls, 114 Overton Rd., Ithaca, N. Y.

3. M. E. Douglas, Rugby Place, Woodbury, N. J.

4. J. Marion Shull, 208 Raymond St., Chevy Chase, Md.

5. Mrs. James R. Bachman, 2646 Alston Drive, Atlanta, Ga.

6. Dr. A. C. Kinsey, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.

7. C. P. Connell, 2001 Grand Ave., Nashville, Tenn.

8. Robert Schreiner, R. 1, Riverview Station, St. Paul, Minn.

9. Euclid Snow, R. P. D. 2, Hinsdale, Ill.

10. Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs, 3715 Turtle Creek Blvd., Dallas, Texas.

11. David C. Petrie, R. P. D. 2, Boise, Idaho.

12. Dr. P. A. Loomis, Colorado Springs, Colo.

13. Carl Starker, Jennings Lodge, Ore.

14. Prof. E. O. Essig, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.

15. William Miles, Ingersoll, Ontario, Canada.

Chairmen of Committees :

Scientific — Dr. A. E. Waller, 233 So. 17th St., Columbus, Ohio.

Election — Dr. C. Stuart Gager, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Membership and Publicity — Dr. II. H. Everett, 1102 Sharp Bldg., Lin¬
coln, Neb.

Registration — C. E. P. Gersdorff, 1825 No. Capitol St., Washington, D. C.
Test Garden 8C Display Garden —

Exhibition — Mrs. W. L. Karcher, 1011 W. Stephenson St., Freeport, Ill.

Bibliography — Mrs. W. II. Peckham, The Lodge, Skylands Farm, Ster-
lington, N. Y.

Awards — Dr. H. H. Everett.

Editor — R. S. Sturtevant, Groton, Mass.

Editorial Board:

S. R. Duffy

Mrs. J. E. Hires

Mrs. Lena M. Lathrop

Mrs. C. S. McKinney
B. Y. Morrison
R. S. Sturtevant

LANTERN SLIDES — -Rental Fee (to members) $10.00. Apply to Mrs.
K. H. Leigh, Mo. Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Mo.

free I n n

NEW YORK

BOTANICAL

GARDEN

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY

COMMENT AND REMARK

■ The October Bulletin has now for some years been devoted
largely to Ratings, the preliminary reports of the Committee on
Awards, and your Editor is not quite sure why this issue is
without a report. It may be a mere delay (when a Society is
wholly dependent upon the good will of its members for a heavy
task, unforeseen personal complications frequently arise) or it
may be due to a general dissatisfaction with the whole principle
of ratings and awards.

By July 15th (the closing date for reports from the accredited
jud ges) only 22 reports had been received, 12 of them from the
New England judges. What more the special letter brought in
I do not know but I know all too well my own reactions as a
judge. Perhaps they are common to many judges. Perhaps they
indicate the reasons behind a general dissatisfaction. At any rate
here they are.

I have been a judge since judges were first invented to develop
standards of excellence in judging Irises on Exhibit. (In 1920-25
garden value was easily judged by averaging ratings as all varie¬
ties were known to manv members.)

Judging is hard. It takes time, great attention to detail, im¬
partiality, and one must acquire a case-hardened attitude towards
both the flowers and their friends. It is not pleasant to rate your
host’s pet seedling at 75 or even 85. It takes much of the joy out
of an iris season when all your time must be given to rating and
if this rating is done (as it must) in public one is always con¬
scious of the bystander, whether he is the originator, the seller,
or merely a “wanting to know how and why” observer.

With all these unavoidable drawbacks every means should be
taken to make judging easy for the judge. The definition of quali¬
ties valued on the score card should be simple and reasonably
permanent. (It is impossible to adjust oneself to new methods
annually.) The judge should be advised what varieties are to be
rated in a specific list and, by some hook or crook, this list should
not be of excessive length. (Rating even 100 varieties is no sine¬
cure for odd moments during a short season.) The method of
recording the rating should be as compact and short as possible as

[11

the experienced judge achieves his total rating almost as a unit
without conscious checking of each characteristic pro and con.
He sees at first glance the crowded stalk and balances it against
the brilliance of color or beauty of form. It is not a matter of
arithmetic; it is a balance of attractions. Clara Noyes, for ex¬
ample, has few high qualities but until superseded we want it
for its unusual coloring, and that effect in the garden which few
other current varieties give.

To me, these three requirements; an accepted, familiar score
card, a specific list of varieties to be considered, and the shortest
method of recording my ratings, will make for pleasant and,
hence, better judging.

To what extent have my requirements been fulfilled these last
few years? The Score Card has been changed fundamentally and
even in minor definitions twice. In 1931 I was requested to rate
all varieties seen; in 1932-1934 those of the present and two
preceding years (if I could remember dates of introduction).
Each year I must fill out a detailed score for each variety. This
involved a good twenty words or figures as a minimum. And
furthermore I must re-rate each year the varieties of previous
years in the same complex manner but on a new loose-leaf form
and, at least once, by a new basis of judging.

It does not seem strange that 75 per cent of the accredited
judges should fail to report in sufficient detail to provide an ade¬
quate average rating even if we make no mention of the storm of
unjustified criticism directed at the judges and the Committee
on Awards.

The question of ratings and of awards was adequately handled
until 1930 by symposia and a very few awards. As the number
of introductions increased trouble began. To reduce the number
of novelties is impossible. To evaluate them fairly in comparison
with other varieties has proved equally impossible. And yet —
the average member needs guidance.

I wonder what would happen if we all went white next year,
then yellow, and so on thus reducing the number of varieties to
be considered and permitting careful comparisons of old and new
varieties. In five years we might be back to the whites again,
ready for a new lot of “purest” or “biggest” or “finest” whites

The Editor.

12]

'THE QUEST OF THE GOLDEN FLEECE”

Harry H. Everett, M. D.

■ From out of the west came word of a golden flood of yellow
iris, just as in olden times Jason sought the golden fleece beyond
the western horizon. I, lured by rumor and glamorous promise,
sought the goal of all iris-lovers, the perfect yellow iris. How
near we have reached our desire on the sun-kissed hillsides of
California, I will tell you.

Because of the early spring our party reached San Bernardino
two weeks before the normal season of bloom, a little late for
the earlier iris. Our party consisted of Mrs. Everett, Robert
Schreiner and myself ; we were later joined by Jesse Nicholls.

Almost at daybreak Mr. White, the proud originator of Lady
Paramount, met us at the station at San Bernardino. From
there we drove, warmed by the early sun through flower-bordered
streets to the crest of a hill high above Riverside where White¬
hall, our objective, lay.

It was difficult to think of iris where palm and pine and
varnished oak hung with vine and framed in varied colors met
one’s eyes in the foreground, while in the distance the mountain
ranges all mauve and lavender rose above the soft gray morning
haze.

Mr. White’s beautiful house rides a ridge high above Redlands,
with its gardens and orange grove sloping sharply to the west
and north. From our quarters in the little Spanish “Casa,” the
view was over the golden fruited orange trees, through pepper,
eucalyptus and palm to the mountain beyond, while from the
rose-hedged terrace of the house the same range was developed
and framed by deodars in the foreground, with eucalyptus, pine
and palm in the middle distance. Always, whether morning,
noon or night, one turned from the glowing colors of the garden
to the soft outlines of the distant hills.

From the terrace a flower bordered path led through rose]
arbors, the most beautiful roses that I have ever seen — roses of
every type, climbers and hybrid teas, all a mass of bloom. The
roses held our interest, and it was hard to believe that any other
flower could be worthwhile.

[3]

The path led on past the tennis court, and then came the
iris — a golden flood of seedlings, row after row beneath the
latticed roof. Incredible as it sounds, Mr. White grows his iris
beneath rather widely spaced laths. The heat of Redlands is
intense in summer, and after our drouth and high temperatures
in Nebraska I can appreciate the need for the protection of
established plants, as well as the new seedlings.

Last year we had a minor drouth and an open winter, perhaps
that explains why the Californians did so well this year in
Nebraska.

The thing that impressed me the most at Mr. AVhite’s was the
preponderance of yellow seedlings from each of several seed
pods. Whites, blues and blends cropped out occasionally in the
seedling rows, but the majority of blooms were some shade of
yellow.

Lady Paramount was at the end of the season, a tall well
branched iris, beautifully flowered, a little disappointing in this,
that it was lighter than I had pictured. Some of the blossoms
were dulled a trifle with a brown overcast which was less how¬
ever, than that occurring on Alta California. One might say, it
was a soft muting of its brilliance. At Berkeley it showed its
Dykes parentage in spotting faintly. Nevertheless it has height,
size, form and grace to perfection, and should be welcomed in
every garden. I believe from my experience with Dykes that it
will be free from these minor defects in the middlewest where
Dykes never spots. It is a really wonderful iris.

To choose between the yellows in the three days given me in
this garden was impossible, even if our inspection stretched from
dawn to dusk. One deep yellow, clear and free from reticulation
or bronzing, was particularly good ; about the height and size and
shape of Sierra Blue, this was the deepest and purest yellow I
have ever seen, not as graceful or frilled or with as broad falls
as Lady Paramount.

The color range in the yellows was from pale cream to deep
yellow, many were bronzed on the falls, quite pleasing. The
characteristics of the plant and the flower varied in the various
seedlings just as did the tones of color. One would have to live
a year or so with these seedlings to properly evaluate them. I
can say at least that among Mr. White’s seedlings and those of
Professor Mitchell’s at Berkeley, are the long awaited yellows in

[4]

tall bearded iris. They equal in purity and depth of color that
attained previously only among the intermediates.

Other interesting and worthwhile seedlings were :

An apricot salmon self of medium height, well branched, broad
hafted, with rounded falls.

A huge soft pinkish blue lavender, indescribably soft and sil¬
very, with clinging standards and flaring falls — a huge crinkled
flower with golden haft.

Another, a peculiar cream, blended mauve pink with color like
a magnolia blossom ; very pleasing.

Brown Betty, lilac and tan blend similar to Churchmouse, but
larger and taller.

Sweet Alibi, a cream yellow of splendid form and extraor¬
dinary substance. This plant blossomed for me this year in
Nebraska, and needs no alibi !

Besides the seedlings, other iris were Easter Morn, Sierra
Blue, Yosemite Falls, the matchless Shining Waters, and many
others of the Californians in splendid form. To these might be
added a large bronzy red purple seedling of Mr. Reibold’s, with
enormous flowers, wide and low branched, and particularly
interesting; also Acropolis, fifty odd inches in height, an enor¬
mous clump, widely branched and covered with bloom.

Other gardens visited in the Redland-Pasadena district were
those of Dr. Berry, Mrs. Lothrop, Miss Hinckley, Dr. Williams,
Mr. Reibold and Mr. Milliken. The time spent in each of these
was of necessity short, but each garden was full of charm and
beauty.

Dr. Berry proved a charming host. Here in his garden the
myriad other plants and flowers led one away from this iris. I
know that he has every species of flower that will grow in Cali¬
fornia, and as Mr. Wister wrote me “he grows them four deep!”
Dainty Wattii grew on 6 ft. stalks in his garden. It was hard
to believe it an iris. We had just a moment in Mrs. Lothrop ’s
garden with its many promising seedlings. Miss Hinckley’s
garden was a new one and the plants just moved, but I noticed
that all her iris were well grown and were an evidence of her
love of the beautiful.

At Reibold’s, one found, in spite of an early spring flood
which covered his plantings with silt, a marvelous profusion of
bloom. Here for the first time I saw the best iris of the Eastern

[5]

and foreign hybridizers grown in good form. Alongside these
the Californians prospered wonderfully. Mr. Reibold has some
good yellows and whites, and in the darker iris and the blends
some beautiful new seedlings.

The impression of some in the East is that most California
iris are blue, but Mr. Reibold, Mr. Milliken, Professor Essig,
Professor Mitchell, and Mr. Salbach, all have blends and darker
iris coming on which have none of the bunching and stubbiness
of many of the Dominio'n seedlings to which we are accustomed,
and which we deprecate.

Dr. William’s smaller garden is crowded with delight. His
bearded iris are unnoticed amongst the Apogons. He grows the
Southern species to perfection, and his many hybrids make one
long to live in a climate which is favorable for their development.
To one who has never seen the iris of Louisiana and their hybrids,
their grace and beauty is unbelievable.

A happy combination of a commercial and hybridizer’s garden
was found at Mr. Milliken ’s. Here he grows the newer seedlings
of Professor Essig, along with the older Californians. He has
a fine collection of the Eastern iris. All seemed to be prosper¬
ing equally well. Such iris as Baldwin, and Blue Velvet which
are said not to do well at San Bernardino and Redlands, were
healthy and blooming profusely. The soil at Mr. Milliken ’s and
at Mr. Reibold ’s seemed mellower and richer than in the other
gardens of the district, perhaps this will explain the varying
behavior i'n the several regions.

Tenaya, Modoc, Pale Moonlight, Shining Waters, Pacific,
Santa Barbara, Mauna Loa under the apple tree with a seven-
foot stalk, Ukiah and San Gabriel were all fine iris and in
fine form.

Inspection of the seedling rows revealed some excellent iris :

One, a glorious pure white of El Capitan form with broad
standards and falls, was the best of those in bloom. I class it
along with Polar King, Jacob Sass’s huge white, and Professor
Essig ’s exquisitely charming new white. These whites are all
different and are the four best I have seen in any garden.

A second white, trailing this first mentioned but little, is of
heavier substance and flaring. Outstanding.

A mauve blue of Santa Fe type was very pleasing.

A rich rosy red iris, a darkened and richer Dauntless, more like

[6]

Joycette in color, displayed only one fault that of rather promi¬
nent veining.

Two more seedlings were of moment; one a large daring bloom
with closed standards, was a soft coppery pink; and the other —
a larger, lighter Aurifero with light golden haft on pure blue, a
clear clean blend.

The Berkeley Region was as interesting and fruitful in sur¬
prises as the Southern California district.

Professor Mitchell’s newer seedlings fell in a yellow flood
adown the hill below his house to meet a yellow pool of his
earlier yellow seedlings in Mr. Salbach’s garden, which lies at
a lower level. Here again it was impossible to pick out the best
or the nearest best of the newer seedlings.

As Lady Paramount stood out among Mr. White’s yellows, so
did Happy Days excel among Professor Mitchell ’s.

Happy Days, as I saw it at Professor Mitchell’s had none of
the characteristics one would expect from Dykes parentage. It is
a glorious plant with large graceful flowers, tall and well
branched, of a slightly deeper yellow than Lady Paramount.
These two seedlings, Happy Days and Lady Paramount, are
easily the two best yellows which I have seen, far superior to any
of the American or European introductions to date. Neither
are deep yellows.

One can travel along his seedling rows and find iris after iris
worthy of the highest praise. No where to my knowledge, ex¬
cept in the gardens of Mr. White and of Professor Mitchell, can
directed crosses so productive of yellow be found.

Inasmuch as the Mitchell and the Salbach Gardens lie to¬
gether, and as Mr. Salbach has the distribution of the Mitchell
seedlings, I shall treat them together.

Taking the yellows, first in order, was Alta California, tall,
stately and beautiful in mass. When it is seen from a distance
one forgets that it is not a pure yellow but is faintly washed with
bronze.

Sunol, not as tall as California, is of Ochracea type, but is
larger and cleaner and better branched.

California Bear is a deep, clear yellow.

California Gold is brassy yellow, with large flowers.

Natividad, a creamy white, with a golden throat, was one of
the best iris in any of the gardens.

[7]

Among the new Mitchell seedlings, one might mention a clear,
medium yellow of very heavy substance, splendid form. Out¬
standing.

A sulphur yellow, large, round and broadly ruffled, also
outstanding.

Three cream Eastern Morns, very fine, which range from light
cream in the lightest to nearly sulphur yellow in the deepest.

A true porcelain blue, a small flower with red gold beard,
delightful.

A soft peach yellow or apricot yellow, a large plant and
flower, outstanding.

A large cream plicata, almost a yellow plicata. This plicata is
a step toward yellow plicatas, but is far short of two large true
yellow plicatas I saw in Mr. Han S ass’s garden this springs —
nevertheless it is a worthwhile iris.

The iris above noted are by no means all which are worthy of
comment.

Leaving the yellows one comes to Neon, which is perhaps the
most brilliant and intriguing of all the coast iris, a glowing “near”
variegata. It is unfortunate that the variegatas in commerce are
too dull to be the ultimate in their class.

Two “reds” were interesting. “Prof. S. B. Mitchell” is a deep
ruby claret, of good size and quite attractive. Pubes which did not
impress me at Mr. White’s or Mr. Milliken’s, was tall and well
branched, rich red brown in color — outstanding at Mr. Salbach ’s.

Tenaya, an Essig seedling, a good companion for his Ukiah, both
outstanding.

Dark Knight (Salbach) rich velvety auricula purple, nearly a
self, with a medium gold beard, and falls of rich blackish mahogany
purple. Dominion type of stem but far better spaced than the
usual Dominion seedling, outstanding.

Brunhilde ('Salbach) a self the coloring of Blackamoor, does not
fade, is widely and freely branched.

Brunhilde ’s Sister (Salbach), similar to Brunhilde, more widely
branched. I do not know which is the better iris.

Rosy Asia (Mitchell), as the name suggests is very pleasing.

Of the Eastern iris, Indian Chief, Blackamoor, Dauntless, Black
Wings, Raineses, Clara Noyes, Desert Gold, Irma Pollack, King
Karl, King Tut, Persia, Pink Satin were completely at home and
giving a good account of themselves.

Two iris I had never seen and which are outstanding are Mr.

[8]

Wareham’s “Legend,” easily the peer of any iris I saw; Dr. Clio-
baut, a French introduction is to be classed along* with Mr. Grint-
er’s two blues, Jacob Sass’s Blue Monarch, and Professor Essig ’s
matchless line of blues.

If one is distracted from the iris by the marvelous roses and
camellias in Mr. White’s garden, just imagine what confusion is
caused by the hundred varieties of fuchsias which thrive and bloom
in the beautiful hillside garden of Professor Essig. His home is
perched aloft on the hill above Berkeley, and from the broad win¬
dow of an over hanging porch one looks down across the garden
far and away, beyond San Francisco, to and through the Golden
Gate. His garden is one of many levels with winding paths rock-
banked and edged, with a pool fed by a murmuring spring. As
with Mr. Berry, the nooks and corners are filled with unusual plant
life so that one forgets to look at the iris until one realizes that
here are the world’s best blues — 'Pacific, California Blue, Pale
Moonlight, Yosemite Falls, Sierra Blue, and finally the ultimate in
blues, Shining Waters.

Everywhere I went I saw Easter Morn splendidly grown and
very attractive. Professor Essig has many other promising seed¬
lings across the street, but again time was too limited to properly
inspect them.

Westward from Berkeley and above San Quentin on the penin¬
sula, lies Mt. Tamalpais and Mill Valley with the redwood trees.
In company with Mrs. Everett, Robert Schreiner, and J esse Nicholls
this region was visited and on the way we stopped at Mrs. Elizabeth
Hardee’s. Her house and gardens were very beautiful, and here I
found also good seedlings with one particular gem outstanding, a
pinkish lavender Loetetia Michaud — a very lovely thing. Leaving
the Hardee’s, the Scudder Ranch was visited with its long rows of
standard varieties splendidly grown. Unfortunately the seedlings
were not in full bloom, but here and there were pleasing blooms.

The thing that impressed me most on the coast was the intensive
line breeding which was productive in two especial directions, the
yellows and the lighter blues. These are unsurpassed. A begin¬
ning has been made in the deep red and blue purple classes, some
worthwhile blends are appearing but none of the type of Jean
Cayeaux, Zaharoon, Mary Geddes, or Coralie ; nor do we see such
things as Ayers has produced in his Burning Bronze or Mr. Kirk¬
land in his new coppery iris of which Copper Lustre is the fore-

[9]

runner. As yet there are no Blue Velvets/ or Royal Beauties. One
new plicata of the Los Angeles type, more boldly marked, I saw
in Mr. Jory’s garden — a real addition to the earlier ones of Mr.
Mohr’s.

All in all the hybridizers of the west coast have sustained the
high standards set by Mr. Mohr, and in two fields, the tall bearded
yellows and the blues excel all others.

It is to be hoped that tender parentage is now so attenuated
that most if not all of the California iris will find a congenial
home in Eastern Gardens.

Old Favorites — What can compare with them? “Is it not
curious that with our hundreds of novelties to select from we
can select no substitutes among them all for certain gardening
schemes ? I would be glad to know if any members can suggest
improved varieties comparable in use and tone to Her Majesty,
Crimson King, Bluet, Tom Tit, Cluny, Barton Harrington, De-
jazet, Reverie, or Iris King. I think they all date before 1920
and a few are far older and yet each maintains its hold in my
affection and no rivals have been found. I like many of the new
things also but it seems about time that some one spoke up for
the old but not decrepit irises.”

[10]

OREGON IRISES
Carl and Louise H. Starker

■ The Pacific slope is a region particularly rich in iris species
and varieties. The hunting and classifying of these plants is a
very fascinating affair, and there is still a great deal of work
to be done before the matter will be fully cleared up.

For several years we have been collecting iris plants and re¬
ceiving plants from collector friends from all over the State of
Oregon, but, curiously enough, instead of having our ideas on
the various species of irises clarified by this research and collec¬
tion, we find matters becoming more and more confused, and the
ideas of the people who should know about these plants from
actual working with them and collecting them, becoming more
and more at variance. We think that this condition arises largely
from the fact that a good many of the species, while sufficiently
diverse to deserve the name of species, do quite closely resemble
each other, while within the species there occurs such a wide
variety of form and color that, unless a person is well acquainted
with the different variations which occur in nature, he is quite
likely to regard the various forms as species. Beside which it is
quite within the range of possibility that the various species
hybridize in nature, as the species seem to be quite fertile, and
the localities in which they are found often overlap. In short,
it seems to us that many of the native western irises are still in
a state of fusion, as it were, and that one species tends to grade
naturally into another, which sadly puzzles the poor botanist, and
makes for endless worry and contention.

Mr. Dykes, the eminent British authority on irises made a rea¬
sonably clear division of the species found in our state, and in
describing them we shall adhere to his classification, adding at the
end those species which have been discovered since his death.
There are other varieties in his classification besides those which
we shall mention, but we are confining ourselves to those irises
which are to be found growing wild in the State of Oregon.

In general the native irises seem to fall into two classes, one
with comparatively large rhizomes, clothed in the broad tough
remnants of the leaves of former seasons. In general habit they
resemble Iris ensata, and have broad leaves of quite heavy sub¬
stance.

[ll]

There are two irises native to Oregon which belong to this
group, longipetala and Missouriensis. They are on the whole
very similar, so that a general description will do for both,
with a few special notes of differences in the case of Iris Mis¬
souriensis.

Iris longipetala is a type of iris preferring a warm climate.
It is found near the seacoast in the extreme southern part of
Oregon, and in California. It is a nearly evergreen species which
does not lose its old leaves until the new ones start to grow in the
fall. The tall strong leaves, rising to a height of 18-24 inches
are about % to 1 inch wide, and are grayish green with a
glaucous sheen. The stem, which is of the same height as the
leaves, is quite stiff, and bears two flowers with a white ground
heavily striped and splotched with lavender, so that the general
effect of the blossom is a light lavender. The flower segments
do not taper to a point, but are blunt, and often indented in the
center.

Iris Missouriensis seems to be an upland form of longipetala ,
and is found in the central and eastern parts of the state, and
ranges even further east. It differs from longipetala mainly in
the foliage which is not evergreen, and in the fact that the flower
stems are always longer than the leaves, which are both shorter
and narrower than those of longipetala. The flowers are similar
to the flowers of longipetala , but there is a lovely white form as
well as the type which is variously veined lavender. In our
estimation, Missouriensis is a finer garden form than longipetala ,
as it has a more delicate and graceful appearance, and the flow¬
ers, being borne above the leaves tend to show off to better ad¬
vantage. It would seem, too, that this variety might be hardier
in a colder climate, as it is an upland form and does not have
the evergreen leaves of longipetala.

These irises need a somewhat heavy soil, and plenty of water
during the growing and blooming season, although they can stand
complete drouth after that, in fact in nature the ground in
which they grow often bakes almost as hard as concrete in the
summer.

The second group of native Oregon irises have slender rhizomes
with comparatively few root filaments. The leaves are thick and
tough and are notable for the fact that they turn a red-brown

[12]

Geo. C. Stephenson

IRIS MISSOURIENSIS

[13]

color when they die. Most of them have quite conspicuous pink
or reddish color at the base of the leaves. They have almost in¬
numerable color variations, and a long blooming season.

Iris tenuis is a rare iris, and a very lovely one when it is well
grown. It, is found 'only in rather deep woodland and in a few
spots along the Clackamas and Molalla rivers, and as the country
along these rivers becomes more settled, and the fir forests des¬
troyed, the plant becomes harder and harder to find. It has in
fact entirely disappeared from two or three of the places where
we used to find it in abundance.

It differs from most irises in that it needs a rather heavy shade
to do really well. The pale green leaves are about a foot long
and half inch wide, and of a more delicate and thinner texture
than most of our native irises. It differs from all other western
irises in having a deeply forked stem. In nature the rhizomes
creep widely and produce somewhat scanty tufts of foliage with
only a few flowers, but when the plant is suited in cultivation, it
changes quite surprisingly in habit. The growth becomes more
compact and the flowers much more numerous. Some of our plants
which bloomed last season had from twenty to thirty flowers, and
when these faded, more came on.

The blossoms, which are smaller, and perhaps not so showy as
some of the other native irises, are nevertheless very delicate and
lovely. The flower segments are relatively wide in proportion to
their length and the blossom has a flatter look than is common to
most of onr native species. The color is a creamy white very faint¬
ly veined with purple, and with a yellowish splotch on the throat.

Iris bracteata is to be distinguished from other irises by the
fact that while the upper surface of the leaves is glossy, the
under surface is of a dull, glaucous character. The rootstalk is
a slender creeping rhizome with few branches which produces its
leaves in scanty tufts. The stem which is shorter than the leaves
is clothed in several bract-like leaves, a fact to which the plant
owes its name. The base of the shoots are quite highly colored
with brown or red on the new growth. The flower, which is
large and wide-petalled opens out quite flat. It is of a bright
yellow color more or less marked with brownish-purple veins.
It varies less widely than do most of the native species. It is a
lovely garden plant, as the flowers are quite large, lovely in
color, and of a pleasing form and substance.

[14]

Geo. C. Stephenson

IRIS CHRYSOPIIYLLA

L15]

Iris macrosiphon is different from the other native irises be¬
cause it has a short stem and a long perianth tube, sometimes as
much as three inches long. The leaves are either bright green or
somewhat glaucous, and the flowers vary endlessly in color
through red and purple, blue and even white, and in some cases
the color of the flowers on the same plant will vary.

Chrysophylla is similar to Iris macrosiphon, but the leaves
seem to be lighter green in color and more yellowish. The flow¬
ers are of a creamy white with a few golden veins which sparkle
in the sun.

Iris Douglasiana is a very robust species which grows near the
seacoast in southern Oregon and California. The strong ever¬
green foliage is of a deep bluish green color and grows in very
dense tufts. The flower heads of two to three blossoms are borne
on stems but little longer than the foliage. The blossoms which
are quite large and somewhat ruffled, vary widely in color from
white forms to deepest purple, and the habit of the plant, too,
seems to vary to some extent, as some forms seem to have much
more robust foliage than others ; some forms, too, are much more
floriferous than others. This is a generally satisfactory plant in
the garden, but to our mind, it is not so beautiful in the garden
as Iris tenax, as its heavy tufts of foliage tend to somewhat
obscure the beauty of the blossoms.

Iris tenax is the iris common on the hillsides and in the fields
all through the western part of Oregon and Washington, and
though it is so common that many people disdain it, its real value
as a garden plant is beginning to be realized. Its leaves are
more slender than those of the Iris Douglasiana, and its tufts of
lighter green foliage are looser and less dense ; in fact the whole
plant has a looser, more graceful appearance. The flowers which
are usually borne singly are in general quite similar to those of
the Iris Douglasiana, although they are not so much ruffled.
They are larger in proportion to the size of the plant, and seem
to be more graceful and showy. There seems to be a wide dif¬
ference of opinion about the stem length of this iris, and most
authorities place it somewhere between three and six inches. In
this part of the country where it is most common and at its best,
however, it is more nearly between eight and ten inches. This is
a plant that tends to improve under cultivation ; the flowers be-

[16]

Geo. C. Stephenson

IRIS TENAX, BLUE FORM

]7]

«• •

come larger, finer and more ample, the stems grow longer, and
the whole plant seems to expand under the genial warmth of a
little care and attention.

Although we have been familiar with this iris for many years,
and have realized the fact that it varied widely, it is only quite
recently that we have had its extreme range of variability com¬
pletely brought home. This spring we had the pleasure of
visiting the garden of a collector friend who has spent several
years in collecting the various color forms of this iris while the
plants were in bloom. There we saw all shades and colors
strikingly displayed and it was indeed a revelation to us. There
were pure white forms, beautifully marked with gold down the
center of the falls, there were cream colored and apricot forms;
there were white blossoms edged with pink; there were pearl
gray flowers; there were blossoms of orchid, lavender, blue, and
deepest purple strikingly set off by a white blotch in the center
of the falls, and there were other color variations almost without
end. The flower segments, too, varied in width, some were quite
wide and ample and others were more narrow and delicate. In
many cases the plants were so full of bloom that the foliage could
scarcelv be seen.

The blossoms of Iris tenax make very good cut flowers, and a
bouquet of the various color forms is most unusual and charming.

Iris Gormani is one of the vexed species which some authorities
declare has no right to be a species at all. It seems to be almost
exactly like Iris tenax, except that the plant is perhaps a little
more slender in growth, and the flowers are a bright yellow.
It is found only in a comparatively restricted area in the coast
range mountains of Oregon, and while it may deserve rank as a
species, it would seem that this might be doubtful in view of the
fact that tenax itself presents so wide a variation in colors. So
far as the gardener is concerned it can be treated as if it were
tenax, and welcomed into the garden where it will prove to be
a very satisfactory plant.

Iris innominata is a newly discovered species of great beauty
which is found near the coast in the southern part of the state.
Its deep green foliage is quite grass-like, although of a heavy
texture, and is about 8-12 inches in length. When well estab¬
lished it forms quite good-sized tufts of leaves, although the plants

[18]

Brew Sherrard

IRIS GORMANI

[19]

do not seem to be quite so robust as those of tenax. It is very
floriferous, and a well grown specimen will produce flowers in
such abundance that they completely hide the foliage. This is
a very lovely thing with fine, much ruffled flowers of varying
shades of yelloAV, more or less marked with brown lines and
reticulations. Some plants have almost clear yellow forms, some
are more nearly apricot, and some are a deep butter yellow, while
some are orange. We have been told that there are lavender and
purple forms, but we have never seen any of these. We have no
doubt that when this iris is better known that further color varia¬
tions will appear.

All the irises in the group just described seem to enjoy a
loose soil enriched with leaf mold and humus. Although many
of them grow in the open in nature, we have found that they do
better in the garden if they are given a little shade. We think
this is easily explained by the fact that in nature they are some¬
what shaded by weeds and grass after they have flowered, and
are not weeded and left to stand alone in the bed as they are in
the garden.

These plants have in the past acquired a bad name for being
hard to transplant. This has been the fault of the grower, how¬
ever, and not of the plant. He has failed to realize that these
plants cannot be shipped when they are dormant, but must be
moved when growth is active, either in early spring or after
the fall rains have begun. By observing these simple rules, we
have shipped many of these irises to the Atlantic coast, and they
not only grew, but flowered the following season. It is true,
however. That these irises will do better if they are left alone
after they are once established, and are not really at their best
until they have been established for two or three years.

The endless variations in color and form, and the near ap¬
proach of one species to another among these irises offers a very
tempting field for experiment and research. We are sure that
many interesting and beautiful varieties should be obtained with
a little patience and skill. — Jennings Lodge, Oregon.

[20]

DISTINCTIVE POINTS IN DESCRIPTIONS

R. S. Sturtevant

■ In assembling descriptive data of varieties and in attempting
to extract from such a mass of detail the few characteristics
which, as a group, may serve to identify a specific variety the
importance of minor variations is greatly emphasized. And
equally strongly do we realize that most of our descriptive terms
are impossible of definition.

All descriptions of growth and of measurement (of either
foliage, stalk, or flower) vary with cultural and climatic condi¬
tions. We can use extremes only; very broad leaves, very weak
growth (though few such achieve introduction), very large, or
very small. And, even then, the reader must compare the leaf
or flower to that of other varieties grown under the same condi¬
tions to perceive the little below, or above, the average.

Carriage, the angularity of the branch (if developed) as it
leaves the stalk, to a lesser degree, the varying arches of standard,
of fall, or style-branch, all tend to be less dependent on growing
conditions. But again it is only the exceptional that we can
quote as a distinguishing characteristic. Certain varieties are
short, high, and close branched as in the old pallidas, others
branch at a 45 degree angle (many pallida-variegatas and even
kashmiriana derivatives) while still others, under good condi¬
tions, develop four long branches and even side branches forming
a candelabra. Dominion gave us a race of short branched varie¬
ties, the buds often pointing toward the stalk and hence crowd¬
ing the flowers. The same crowding may be due to fastigiate
branching, and is present all too often in our novelties when we
see well-grown specimens. Few are well (4 or more) branched.
(Poor growth means few branches and, hence, no apparent
crowding in many cases.)

Carriage in the segments of the flower (as does the depth and
hue of color also) varies with the age of the bloom even more
than with varying culture or weather. Under extremes of heat
or moisture only flowers of exceptional substance develop any¬
thing but floppy standards and straight-hanging falls. We try
again to pick a normal development and, to an extent, an erect
standard will tend to fold on itself and the arched standard to
flop down on the style-branches.

[21]

Color, if it empurples the base of the leaf sheaves or spathes
seems a reliable point; if it tinges the hairs of the beard with
brown or blue, tips them with orange it is to be looked for
eagerly and immediately as a distinguishing characteristic; as a
flush, as a wire edge to the segments, as a reticulation on haft
and claw it may easily prove identification. (Flecks such as we
find in W. R. Dykes and many other yellows are variable). You
may note that in each case such an area of color is apt to be so
small (or so elusive) that it is not readily compared to a chart
and is hence more easily understood as a descriptive term.

In plicatas, the pervading color or hue of the markings is
usually intensified on the style branches and, in many blends
also, the color so located indicates the predominance of yellow,
or blue, or red in the general effect.

In hafts, the ground color may be white, light, or citron yellow'
in contrast to the color of the blade of the fall or it may be suf¬
fused with the blade color (and hence inconspicuous) or it may
be sparsely or closely set with fine or heavy reticulations. The
conspicuously light haft (as in Aphrodite) tends to destroy the
unity of the color effect. The richly yellowed haft, particularly
if emphasized by a projecting orange beard gives life and warmth
and brilliance to many a white or blend. And among the novel¬
ties there is a most interesting group of darks enlivened by
reticulations of ochre, morocco, or brick red. Both as a distin¬
guishing characteristic and for garden effect the color of the
haft is of almost vital importance.

The broad areas of standard and fall do not lend them¬
selves to accurate color descriptions, especially among the blends.
Though chart comparisons are made out of direct sunlight and
flowers of about the same age are used, descriptions made in
different gardens, by different people, or on different days will
vary a few hues at the best. The hues may remain relatively
deeper, or pinker, or bluer, in certain localized areas (as below
the beard, at the edge) but that is all. Hence the layman should
not be too discouraged at a color description taken from Ridg-
way’s Chart. The name of the color may well carry some picture
to his mind, but where it occurs is even more important.

The actual shape of a standard or often of a fall (oval, oblong,
or whatnot) so rarely affects the appearance of the flower that

[22]

I rarely note it. The oblong blade of a straight-hanging fall
may enhance the lop-eared effect of the flower, or we may prefer
a circular blade to the broad wedge of blade and haft. AVe do
value breadth in petal, in haft, even in claw of standard as we
dislike a spidery bearded iris flower.

And now for a few general observations as to these particular
descriptions and their reliability. Before 1928 when the last lot
wras published I knew and could compare perhaps 90 per cent
of the current varieties. That is now far from being the case
and the resulting descriptions are consequently just that much
less helpful. In themselves they are as accurate, but it is not
possible to give added emphasis to the general effect which often
makes a well-known variety unforgetable.

Let us consider a batch of new whites. In Selene and Parthenon
the base of the foliage is empurpled which sets them apart from
most of the others; Selene has more straight-hanging falls that
occasionally pinch a bit, the napthalene yellow flush on the haft
is finely reticulated olive ochre; in Parthenon the heavy reed
yellow to olive yellow reticulations are equally widely spaced.
My impression is that Parthenon far excels Selene in size and
carriage and yet those heavy reticulations are all I can express in
words as reliable points of distinction. If I were more familiar
with the two varieties I probably could never mistake one for the
other. Looking to Gudrun which memory tells me is much more
compact, a fuller bloom and not be confused with the other
whites, I find a conspicuous, projecting orange beard that is not
paralleled in Purissima, Easter Morn, Sitka, AVambliska, New
Albion, Venus cle Milo, or even Polar King with its equally con¬
spicuous yellow beard, or Micheline Charraire with its con¬
spicuous but merely orange tipt beard and the added points of
chrome to chestnut reticulations.

Now for the Purissima, Venus de Milo and Easter Morn group,
the first with a greenish mid-rib to the standards and a very
few rather dark purple reticulations on the claw (darker than
those of Easter Morn) and a short white beard; the second with
pale lemon reticulations on the haft which is also inconspicuous,
and the third with clear reed yellow reticulations on a conspicu¬
ous haft (the edges of the falls also serrate). In Polar King the
more olive reticulations seem to cast greenis'h reflections on the

[23]

standards. In New Albion we have the purest haft and it may
be differentiated from Purissima by its orange tipt beard and
more flaring falls. In Sitka we have a channeled haft conspicu¬
ous for its blurred heavy greenish yellow reticulations. Its
bluish white standards suggest the bluish white of Lady Gage
(yellow, orange tipt beard) or Wambliska (with olive buff to
yellow haft reticulations and prune purple claw reticulations).

Now, of the lot I know Easter Morn the best but I could easily
mistake a poor Easter Morn for a good Venus de Milo. Sitka or
the lower Lady Gage I might distinguish from Wambliska.
Polar King has almost too heavy a stalk, Selene and Parthenon
too open flowers but if you added to all these mentioned
Micheline Charraire, Argentina, Bolingbroke, Sophronia. Snow
White, Char tier and many more I could group them as variegata
whites, as pallida whites, as Kashmir whites, or cypriana-meso-
potamica whites but, from memory, I should never be able to
differentiate one from another in the same group. In one garden,
in one season, any one of the lot may be superb. We tend to
remember that climax and hesitate to recognize the variety in
poor condition.

With this example of the difficulties of identification and
description taken from the whites you can well imagine the pos¬
sibilities among blends, or reds, blues, or even, nowadays, yel¬
lows. The happy days of really knowing irises are gone. One
must guess or, in a few cases, go to a stock description which
may or may not prove adequate. I wonder how soon some of us
will specialize on collecting only irises of a given color.

DESCRIPTIONS OP VARIETIES, PART VI

R. S. Sturtevant

Previous descriptions of varieties together with introductory
notes and definitions will be found in Bulletins 6, 7, 9, 12, and
29. With each passing year it has become less possible to secure
adequate descriptions as few breeders record completed data
cards.

In selecting varieties to describe we attempted to include such
as had received awards and we were sadly handicapped by the
poor bloom resulting from the winter of 1933-34 in New England.
With few exceptions varieties are described as seen in New

[24]

England in 1934 and include a surprising number of so-called
tender varieties.

Ratings are not given as the annual ratings of 1931 and
1932 were based on different score cards and were not given the
same permanence as those of the 1928 symposium.

Names of both originator and introducer are given. Dates are
of registration and of introduction and indicate the growers who
comply with registration requirements.

Color classification is both by word (as in previous descrip¬
tions) and by letter and number in accordance with the color
classification given in the Alphabetical Check List; viz., W —
white; B — blue toned; R — red toned; S — blend; Y — yellow: the
numbers 1, 2, 3, indicate a blue tone of W, R, S, or Y; the num¬
bers 4, 5, 6, a yellow tone; of 7, 8 9, a pink to red tone; further¬
more the numbers 1, 4, 7 indicate also a self color; 2, 5, 8, plicata;
3, 6, 9, bicolor. L, M, and D. light, medium, and dark.

Seasonal indications are given by the letters B, early; M,
medium; F, late. As this system was initiated in 1932, not all
varieties have been recorded. It should be remembered that a
variation of a few days in New England may correspond to
bloom over a few months in Southern California (e. g. San
Gabriel) .

All color terms are referred to “Color Standards and Nomen¬
clature” by Robert Ridgway (see also Bulletin 6 for an outline
of terms).

Awards. Unless otherwise specified awards are given by the
A. I. S. either annually or to flowers on exhibit. No such A. M.
has been given to any cut-flower — R.H.S. — Royal Horticultural
Society. N.H.F. — Nationale Societe d’Horticole de France.

ALCINA

Bicolor, blend M-63L Connell 1927-1931

Brief. Large; S. deep olive buff slightly flushed with the deep lavender of
the falls ; 30 in.

Details. S. arching; F. drooping to straight-hanging; haft and beard con¬
spicuous ; very fragrant.

Remarks. A full flower, excellent in mass; apparently the gray blue sister of
Nepenthe and Audabe.

ALLURE

Self, blend S4L Murrell 1927

Brief. Pale olive buff ; F. flushed pale laelia pink, the haft conspicuous pale
citron yellow; 40 in.

Details. Flower open, not large; S. arched; F. drooping; stalk well and widely
branched; beard pale yellow; spathes scarious.

Remarks. A clear and taller Mady Carriere.

[25]

ALTA CALIFORNIA

Bicolor, blend S6D Mohr-Mitchell 1931

Brief. Of Caterina shape and habit; S. mustard yellow; F. olive buff flushed
vinaceous; 4 ft.

Details. S. domed; notched; F. drooping; haft conspicuous, closely dotted
and veined; beard yellow orange.

Remarks. Color of Endymion, a deeper Gilead.

ALTIORA

(Raleigh x Gabriel)

Bicolor B1L Bliss- Sturtevant 1932

Brief. Stalk well-branched ; S. bluish lavender with tips adpressed ; F. laven¬
der violet fading mauve at edge, flaring to drooping; 45 in.

Details. Spathes inflated, with keel; beard white, yellow tipt.

Remarks. Blue tone of E. H. Jenkins or Azure.

AMANULLAH

Bicolor B1L Baker, G. P. 1932

Brief. Long, open; S. bluish lavender; F. pleroma violet fading at edge,
conspicuous cream haft heavily reticulated morocco red ; 39 in.

Details. S. arching; F. straight hanging; spathes scarious; beard yellow,
projecting; styles buff with yellow keel.

Remarks. Similar to Mardi.

ANNDELIA

Plicata, W2L Sturt. 1928-1929

Brief. White, thickly dotted Chinese violet; center light; 33 in.

Details. High branched; S. domed; F. drooping, waved; beard white, orange
tipt.

Remarks. A much paler Parisiana.

AURIFERO

(Marian Mohr x — ) x Sherbert

Self B1L Mohr-Mitchell 1923-1927

Brief. Low and widely branched; very pale wistaria violet to bluish lavender,
the haft conspicuously flushed amber to wax yellow; 45 in.

Details. S. domed; F. straight hanging; beard projecting, conspicuous, orange
tipt.

Remarks. The yellow haft suggests a blend rather than a self.

AVONDALE

( — x Rameses)

Bicolor, blend R9D Sass, H. P. 1933

Brief. Rich; S. magenta flushed Hays russet; F. dahlia purple; haft and
styles amber, conspicuous; beard orange, conspicuous; 33 in.

Details. S. arching revolute; F. straight hanging, ruffled.

Remarks. Described as a one year plant.

BALDWIN

Self B7M Sass, H. P. 1926-1927

Brief. Lavender violet with bluish flush below beard and an almost solid
hydrangea red reticulation on haft; 40 in.

Details. S. with tips adpressed; F. drooping to straight hanging; beard
bluish, yellow tipt; styles over arching; spathes flushed.

Remarks. Excellent mass.

BLACK WINGS

Bicolor B7D Kirkland 1930

Brief. Well and widely branched; S. Ilortense violet, wire edge; F. velvety
prune purple; 3 ft.

Details. S. arching, revolute; F. flaring to drooping; haft blurred; beard
brown specked; spathes scarious, with keel.

Remarks. Of midnight blue effect. Compare with Mephisto or Rhadi. H. M.,
1931.

BLUE AND GOLD

(California Blue x Louis Bel)

Self BID Essig 1929-1931

Brief. Well-branched; lavender violet, the broad haft reticulated pompeian
red; 3 ft.

Details. S. arching to overlapping; F. drooping; texture slightly creped ;
beard conspicuous, orange tipt.

Remarks. Excellent mass. A lower Sierra Blue or Santa Barbara.

BLUE JUNE

(Sensation x — )

Self B1M Donahue 1931

Brief. Widely branched; pale bluish lavender to bluish lavender with con¬
spicuous light haft; cream edge to styles; 40 in.

Details. S. erect; F. flaring to drooping, waved; beard conspicuous, yellow-
orange ; very fragrant.

Remarks. Charming mass of smoothly finished flowers; deeper than Mary
Barnett.

BRONZE BEACON

(Coronado x Glowing Embers)

Bicolor, blend S6M iSalbaeh 1932

Brief. Long and widely branched; S. flushed vinaceous fawn, dark wire
edge; F. deep dahlia purple fading to edge; heart of flower and styles
primuline yellow; 4 ft.

Details. Foliage tinged at base, also spathes; S. conic; F. drooping; haft
reed yellow to white, conspicuous and heavily veined morocco red; beard
conspicuous, brownish, orange tipt.

Remarks. Reported as very late; a warmer Picador.

BUECHLEY’S GIANT

Self B1L Buechley 1932

Brief. Large; light haft and styles; S. pale lavender violet fading lighter;
F. pleroma violet fading to pale mauve at edge; 4 ft.

Details. A spreading flower; S. erect; F. drooping with flaring tips; beard
projecting, orange tipt.

Remarks. Might be described as a paler Titan.

BURMAH

Self B1M Pilkington 1930

Brief. Spreading, compact flower; S. pleroma violet; F. anthracene violet,
the ivory yellow haft heavily reticulated morocco red; 39 in.

Details. S. domed; F. flaring to drooping; beard bluish, orange tipt.

CALIFORNIA GOLD

Self Y1D Mohr-Mit-Salbach 1933

Brief. An oblong, compact flower, rich empire yellow, the broad haft finely
reticulated raw sienna; 39 in.

Details. S. arching; F. drooping to straight hanging; beard projecting,
orange.

Remarks. Described as a yearling, the color of Pluie d ’Or but effect richer
and a much larger flower.

CINNABAR

Biolor S9D Williamson 1928

Brief. Branched below center; S. amethyst violet; F. velvety prune purple
the haft blurred with morocco red; 40 in.

Details. S. arched, rounded at tips; F. drooping to straight hanging, circular;

beard projecting, yellowr tipt.

Remarks.

[27]

CLARA NOYES

Bicolor, veined blend S9L Sass, H. P. 1930-31

Brief. Very ruffled flower; S. fawn to russet vinaceous; F. widely veined
livid brown on amber yellow; 33 in.

Details. Widely branched; wire edge on S. & F. S. frilled and fluted; F.
drooping, ruffled; beard orange; the pale purplish vinaceous haft conspicuous,
the orange beard not.

Remarks. A lovely pinkish apricot mass for the garden. II. M., 1931; A. M.,
1932.

CLAUDE AUREAU

(Claude Monet x Bruno)

Bicolor Y9D Cayeux 1928

Brief. S. olive lake to mustard yellow; F. velvety pansy purple bordered
olive lake; 2 ft.

Details. Well-branched; S. erect; F. flaring to straight hanging; haft con¬
spicuous; beard orange.

Remarks. A fine rich but blended variegata. C. M., N. H. F., 1928.

COPPERSMITH

Bicolor, blend S7M Shull 1926

Brief. Compact flower; S. light purplish vinaceous; F. flushed dull magenta,
the light haft reticulated cinnamon rufous; 42 in.

Details. S. & F. with dark wire edge ; S. with tips adpressed ; F. drooping,
quirked at tip, very smooth; spathes flushed.

Remarks. H. M., 1926.

CORONATION

Self YD Moore 1927

Brief. Widely branched; empire yellow throughout; 3 ft.

Details. Foliage tinged at base; S. overlapping; F. flaring to drooping; haft
and claw slightly reticulated and flecked maroon; beard projecting, orange
tipt.

Remarks. Excellent garden effect; flecked occasionally; appears deeper than
Pluie d’Or.

CYDALISE

Plicata Y5 Cayeux 1930

Brief. S. amber to wax yellow at base; F. white, flushed lavender violet
at edge and fading veins burnt lake; 3 ft.

Details. High, though widely branched; S. domed; F. flaring; beard amber
tipt.

Remarks. A big Montezuma but much less yellow. C. M., N. H. F., 1930.

DAUNTLESS

(Cardinal x Rose Madder)

Bicolor R9D Connell 1927-1929

Brief. S. light perpilla purple flushed magenta ; F. velvety amaranth purple
to Bordeaux with conspicuous white to cream haft and orange tipt beard;
3 ft.

Details. Foliage and spathes tinged; S. with tips adpressed, revolute; F. flar¬
ing, ruffled; haft reticulations widely spaced, morocco red; styles color
of S.

Remarks. Almost a self in effect. Dykes Memorial Medal, 1929.

DAY DREAM

(Dejazet x Sherbert)

Bicolor, blend S6L Sturt. 1924-1925

Brief. Short and low branched ; S. cream buff flushed vinaceous cinnamon ;
F. pale rosalane purple; haft and styles yellowed; 40 in.

Details. S. arching, slightly fluted; F. drooping; beard conspicuous, orange-
red tipt.

Remarks. Segments appear too narrow for the height.

DESERT GOLD

Self Y4L Kirkland 1929

Brief. Very pale maize yellow, the conspicuous haft heavily reticulated citron
yellow at sides; 3 ft.

Details. Bather high and short branched; S. arching, rounded, a bit creped ;
F. flaring to drooping, satiny; substance exceptional; beard projecting,
conspicuous, orange; claw reticulated at base an almost prune purple.

Remarks. H. M., 1931. A. M., 1932.

DOROTHY DIETZ

Wyomissing x (Lent A. Williamson?)

Bicolor W6D Williamson 1929

Brief. S. light lavender violet tinged with cream at center; F. velvety anthra¬
cene violet fading lighter but with dark wire edge; 3 ft.

Details. S. erect, revolute; F. drooping, the tips quirked; beard projecting,
white, yellow tipt.

Remarks. Comparable to B. Y. Morrison, but bigger and with more con¬
spicuous haft.

DOXA

Self, blended LB-S6L Sass, IT. P. 1928-1929

Brief. Early; stiff substance; pale sulphur yellow shading to olive buff at
center, the haft flushed diamme brown to a warm blackish purple; beard
conspicuous, orange; 18 in.

Details. S. overlapping; F. flaring.

Remarks. A queer, unforgettable bloom of exceptional substance.

DU ART

Bicolor, blend M-S7 Ayres 1930-1931

Brief. Well-branched; S. honey yellow with wire edge; F. mineral red flushed
fawn at edge; the haft, conspicuous, strontian yellow to white; 40 in.

Details. S. arching, revolute; F. drooping to straight hanging; beard con¬
spicuous, orange; styles broad, with wire edge.

Remarks. Like Dauntless but with a yellow tone throughout.

EASTER MORN -

California Blue x (Argentina x Conquistador)

Self M-W4 Essig 1931

Brief. Well-branched; large, clear white, with reed yellow reticulations on
haft and sparse purple ones on claw; S. arched, pointed; F. flaring,
with serrate edge; beard, white, orange tipt; conspicuous; 42 in.

Details. Substance exceptional; haft and styles very broad, crests fringed.

Remarks. H. M., 1931; Successfully grown in Illinois and Massachusetts.

ELIZABETH EGELBERG

Bicolor R3L Egelberg 1930

Brief. Spreading flower; S. light amparo purple; F. phlox purple, with
conspicuous light haft and yellow beard; 42 in.

Details. Branched below center; S. domed, short; F. flaring to drooping,
conspicuously wedge shaped, blunt.

Remarks. Coloring of Frieda Mohr. Flower rather triangular in effect.

EROS

Self, blend S9M Mead-Riedel 1931-1933

Brief. Pale vinaeeous, flushed cameo pink, the falls with a deeper flush; 3 ft.

[29]

Details. Well and widely branched; S. arching, ruffled; F. drooping; haft
narrow, colonial buff, reticulated honey yellow; beard yellow.

Remarks. Suggestive of Talisman but far finer in New England.

FLAMINGO

(Lent Ax — )

Bicolor, blend S9M Williamson 1929

Brief. S. daphne pink; F. perilla purple; a vivid orange beard on a con¬
spicuous reed yellow haft; 3 ft.

Details. Foliage glaucous, tinged at base; S. erect; F. drooping, rounded;
the sparse reticulations rufous.

Remarks. A paler Red Flare.

GUDRUN

Self W Dykes, K. 1931

Brief. Large; low-branched; a creped, slightly grayish white; beard pro¬
jecting, conspicuous, orange; 3 ft.

Details. S. domed, slightly undulate; F. flaring to straight hanging, the
stiff mid-rib green on the reverse side; haft broad, not conspicuous.

Remarks. C. M. R. II. S. 1930; A. M. 1931; Dykes Medal (English) 1931.
Described as a one year plant.

HAPPY DAYS

( — x W. R. Dykes)

Self EM-Y4H Mitchell-Salbach 1933

Brief. Large, long; amber to primuline yellow at center; projecting beard
orange; 39 in.

Details. Well-branched; S. arching, notched at tip; F. drooping; haft broad,
primuline yellow, finely reticulated morocco red; beard dense, fine; styles
over arching.

Remarks. Described as a one year plant. A deeper, more open flower than
W. R. Dykes

HELIOS

Self Y3L Cayeux 1928

Brief. Napthalene yellow, the falls very faintly veined lavender; beard and
haft not conspicuous ; 3 ft.

Details. Branches rather long, fastigiate; S. arching, with tips adpressed;
F. rounded, drooping; haft edged citron yellow; beard, yellow, orange
tipt; styles erect.

Remarks. A paler Desert Gold; usually less well budded and branched. 0. M.
N. H. F.

HERMITAGE

Bicolor H-RIM Kirkland 1928-1930

Brief. Well-branched; S. Argyle purple flushed amber yellow at base; F.
dahlia purple fading to Hortense violet; 3 ft.

Details. Foliage tinged at base; S. arching; F. drooping; haft conspicuous,
white at center, an almost solid morocco red at edge; beard conspicuous,
yellow-orange ; styles amber yellow.

Remarks. A lighter Jeb Stuart. H. M., 1930.

HOLLYWOOD

(Sindjhka x Magnifica)

Bicolor, blend S9M Essig 1929

Brief. S. Rosolane pink fading to primrose yellow at center; F. Mathews pur¬
ple fading lighter at edge; haft white to citron yellow, conspicuous, retic¬
ulated Kaiser brown; 42 in.

Details. S. overlapping, slightly ruffled at edge; F. drooping to straight hang¬
ing; beard, sparse, projecting, orange.

Remarks. A pinker Mary Geddes.

[30]

IMPERIAL BLUSH

Self F-R7L Sass, H. P. 19315

Brief. A very pale Hortense violet, lustrous, with darker, over-arching styles;
39 in.

Details. Foliage slender; stalk rather high and short branched; flower spread¬
ing; S. arching to domed; F. drooping; haft inconspicuously reticulated
veronia purple; beard, white, orange tipt.

Remarks. “An improved Pink Satin.’ ’

JADU

(Aksarben x — )

Plicata W2 Sturt. 1930

Brief. Palest Hortense violet, the center of F. white, the haft veined and
dotted maroon purple; 3 in.

Details. S. domed, frilled; F. drooping, ruffled; beard dense, projecting, yel¬
low, orange tipt; style crest cream buff.

Remarks. Comparable to Anndelia

JEB STUART

Bicolor, blend S7D Washington-Nesmith 1932

Brief. Compact; S. purplish vinaceous to vinaceous buff, lustrous; F. very
velvety violet carmine lit with morocco red reflections from the haft
reticulations; 3 ft.

Details. Foliage rather slender; S. conic; F. drooping, rounded ; beard project¬
ing, conspicuous, yellow-orange.

Remarks. Unusually rich, brownish in effect.

KARAGDAH

Self S4L Baker, G. P. 1931

Brief. Light to lavender violet, flushed deeper below beard, the broad haft
closely reticulated morocco red; 3 ft.

Details. Compact; S. domed; F. flaring; beard, bluish, yellow tipt; styles
over-arching.

Remarks. With the charm of Lady Lavender but brighter.

KING JUBA

Bicolor, blend S7D Sass, H. P. 1930

Brief. Segments dark edged; S. chamois; F. velvety blackish purple, the
conspicuous haft olive buff to white; beard conspicuous, orange; 30 in.
Details. A long flower; arching, fluted; F. drooping to straight hanging, ob¬
long.

Remarks. A rich Niebelungen. H. M., 1932.

KING PHILLIP

Self E-B7M Fewkes-Nesmith 1934

Brief. An oblong flower, light lavender violet to lavender violet, the haft
flushed deeper and finely reticulated Congo pink; 3 ft.

Details. S. domed, revolute, undulate; F. straight hanging, a bit waved,
beard conspicuous, bluish, orange tipt.

Remarks.

KING TUT

Bicolor, blend S6D Sass, H. P. 1920

Brief. S. vinaceous fawn with a dark wire edge; F. velvety F. Hay’s maroon,
the conspicuous haft empire yellow; 30 in.

Details. S. erect; F. flaring to drooping, ruffled at tip; beard projecting,
orange; styles over-arching, the buff yellow crest fringed.

Remarks. Effect rich. Chromosome number 3G.

KLAMATH

(Ambassadeur x Titan)

Bicolor S4M Kleinsorge 1929

Brief. Large, open ; S. lavender violet, opening to expose the conspicuous
ochre red reticulations on haft and claw; F. pedroma violet; 33 in.
Details. Foliage broad; S. erect, stiff, revolute; F. flaring, a bit ruffled,
stiff; beard, projecting, brownish, orange tipt; styles with buff crest.
Remarks. Jeannette May Kennedy is very similar but redder in effect.

LINDBERGH

Bicolor B3M Arbuckle 1927-1928

Brief. S. pale lavender violet ; F. pleroma violet with lighter edge, the haft
conspicuous, heavily reticulated on white; 33 in.

Details. High branched; S. erect, revolute, ruffled; F. drooping, ruffled;

beard white, yellow tipt.

Remarks. Similar to Eckesachs.

LOS ANGELES

Plicata W2 Mohr-Mit. 1927

Brief. Large, white, the pale blue lavender dots and reticulations confined
to the sides of the blade, the haft, and crest of styles; 42 in.

Details. Well and widely branched; S. domed, circular; F. flaring to droop¬
ing, circular; beard conspicuous, orange tipt; clover scented.

Remarks. More popular than the more heavily bordered San Francisco.
Chromosome No. 49.

MARDI

Bicolor S6 Baker, G. P. 1932

Brief. Well and widely branched; S. hyssop violet; F. nigrosine violet fad¬
ing to mauve at edge, the conspicuous, citron yellow to white haft heavily
veined morocco red ; 4 ft.

Details. S. overlapping; F. drooping with flaring tips; beard conspicuous,
white, orange tipt; styles buff and lavender.

Remarks. A richer Lent A. Williamson.

MARY GEDDES

Bicolor, blend S7L Stahlman-Washington 1930

Brief. Foliage tinged at base; S. vinaceous fawn to buff pink; F. vernonia
purple fading to cinnamon drab below beard; haft, conspicuous brilliant
picric yellow ; beard orange ; 3 ft.

Details. S. arched, rounded at tip; F. flaring to drooping, flat with median
yellow line; spathes flushed.

Remarks. Vishnu coloring but much brighter. II. M., 1930, A. M., 1933.
A. M., R. H. S., 1933.

MELDORIC

(mesopotamica x Eldorado) x Dominion
Bicolor B7D Ayres 1931

Brief. Foliage tinged at base; well-branched; S. Hortense, violet with dark
wire edge ; F. very velvety prune purple, the broad haft a rich sanford
brown; 4 ft.

Details. S. conic, fluted; F. flaring with drooping tips; beard, conspicuous,
white, orange tipt.

Remarks. II. M. 1931.

MIDGARD

Bicolor, blend S4L Sass, II. P. 1926

Brief. Pale to Vinaceous lilac, the center of the flower pinard yellow fading
to warm buff ; 33 in.

Details. High and short branched; S. cupped, fluted; F. drooping to incurved,
ruffled; beard yellow tipt.

Remarks. A pinkish yellow' blend.

[32]

MOON MAGIC

(Sophronia x Coppersmith)

Self YL Shull, 1931

Brief. Ivory yellow deeping at cent or to the empire yellow reticulations of
the haft; exceptional substance; 4 ft.

Details. Bather short branched; S. domed; notched; claw decked maroon;

F. flaring, convex; beard, yellow, orange tipt.

Remarks. H. M., 1932.

MOTIF

(Sherbet x Gaudichau) x Moa

Bicolor M-B7D Sturt. 1929-1931

Brief. Large; S. brilliant hyacinth violet; F. velvety fluorite violet; 33 in.
Details. S. domed; F. flaring to drooping; haft broad, heavily reticulated;

beard bluish, yellow tipt; spathes flushed.

Remarks. Even darker than Meldoric.

MRS. VALERIE WEST

(Dominion x — )

Bicolor, blend STD Bliss-Wallace 1925

Brief. Large; S. light purple drab with purple sheen towards center; F. very
velvety blackish red purple lit by yellow beard and haft; 3 ft.

Details. Rather short branched, buds pointing in; S. domed, rounded at tip;

F. flaring to drooping; styles, short, overarching.

Remarks. A sister seedling of Grace Sturtevant but less richly brown. F. C. C.,
R. H. S. 1933

NATIVIDAD

(Aurifero x ( ‘ Yellow seedling”)

Self W4 Mit.-Sal. 1930-1932

Brief. Large, a waxy cream white, the yellow deepening at the center to beard
and conspicuous haft; 38 in.

Details. Stalk stout; S. domed; F. drooping, the tips incurving, waved, almost
velvety; styles broad, erect; crest very finely fringed.

Remarks. Texture and substance trace back to Miss Willmott on both sides.

NEPENTHE

Bicolor, blend S4L Connell-Kellogg 1927-1931

Brief. Foliage tinged at base; large, lustrous; S. domed, olive buff; F. vina-
ceous lavender fading to olive buff at edge and apricot yellow at haft;
30 in.

Details. Rather high and fastigiate branched; very fragrant; beard sparse,
projecting, yellow; styles narrow.

Remarks. Between Alcina and the yellower aubade in color, similar habit and
form.

NEW ALBION

California Blue x (Argentina x Conquistador)

Self M-W4 Essig-Milliken 1931

Brief. Large; S. erect, bluish white, frilled and fluted; F. flaring, a bit waved;

beard white, orange tipt, not conspicuous; 39 in.

Details. Well branched; substance exceptional; haft only faintly reticulated.
Remarks. Fall bloom reported in 1931.

NUMA ROUMESTAN

Bicolor, blend S9M Cayeux 1928

Brief. Rich; S. magenta; F. brilliant, dull dusky purple with haft heavily
reticulated Prussian red, the orange beard brown specked; 33 in.

Details. High but widely branched; S. arching; F. drooping, a bit ruffled at
edge; styles with amber yellow keel.

Remarks. A redder Labor, not large but distinctively rich.

NUSKU

Bicolor, blend S4L Nesmith 1928-1930

Brief. S. Congo, pink flushed, a lustrous pinkish buff at center; F. flushed ma¬
genta with blue tints below beard, the conspicuous haft heavily reticulated
ochraceous tawny; 3 ft.

Details. Long branched and a long flower; S. arching; P. drooping; beard con¬
spicuous, orange.

Remarks. First registered as Marden.

OPAL DAWN

Self, blend M>S4L Sturt. 1933-1934

Brief. Chamois flushed pinkish cinnamon with honey yellow reflections below
the orange beard; 30 in.

Details. S. domed; F. flaring to drooping; haft reticulations maroon.

Remarks. A darker Zaharoon — satiny. H. M. 1933.

OSPREY

(mesopotamica x Oriflamme) x self

Self B3L Berry 1927

Brief. Low and well-branched; glistening light chicory blue with white haft
conspicuously reticulated yellow; 40 in.

Details. S. domed; F. flaring; beard conspicuous, white, orange tipt.

Remarks. II. M. 1927 Redlands Show.

PACIFIC

(Souvenir de Mme. Gaudichau x Lady Foster)

Self GIL Essig 1929

Bri Large, light lavender violet throughout with faintest maroon reticula-
ons on haft; 42 in.

De Is. Flower rather crepey; S. erect, notched; F. drooping, notched; beard
projecting, bluish, yellow tipt.

R< arks. Color of San Gabriel; probably hardier in the North.

PALE MOONLIGHT

(Sherbert x Argentina)

Se B1L Essig 1931

Brief. Well and widely branched: a very light lavender violet throughout; 4 ft.
Details. S. domed; F. flaring; beard projecting, orange.

Remarks. Bronze Medal Boston Show, 1933, for Best Stalk.

PARMA

(Dawn x Shekinah selfed) x (Delight x Sherbert)

Self, blend S4M Edlmann-Sturt. 1930

Brief. Ilortense violet shading to ochraceous tawny at base of S. — ; hafts old
gold faintly veined cinnamon brown and intensified by the very conspicu¬
ous orange chrome beard; 27 in.

Details. S. domed; F. drooping, very satiny.

Remarks.

PARTHENON

Self W1 Connell 1928-1934

Brief. Foliage tinged at base; large; white, the haft heavily reticulated olive
to reed yellow; 39 in.

Details. S. arching, filled, notched, creped; F. drooping, smooth, with stiff
green mid-rib; beard white, orange tipt; styles narrow and erect; 42 in.
Remarks. Larger than Selene and a warmer white.

PICADOR

(Ember x Bruno)

Bicolor, blend Y9D Morrison-Sturt. 1928-1930

Brief. Foliage tinged at base; large S. honey yellow shaded cinnamon buff;

[34]

F. velvety mineral red to dahlia carmine fading slightly at edge, dark
wire edge; 40 in.

Details. S. arched; F. horizontal to flaring; haft broad, flushed mustard yel¬
low, reticulated heavily mineral red; beard, projecting, yellow orange.

PINK JADU

(Aksarben x — )

Plicata, blend M-R8L Sturt. 1931

Brief. S. flushed and sanded lilac; F. white centered, dotted lilac and veined
blackish purple ; the whole center of the flower flushed cinnamon buff and
intensified by the conspicuous orange tipt beard; 3 ft.

Details. S. domed, ruffled ; F. drooping, ruffled.

Remarks.

PINK SATIN

Self RIL Sass, J. 1930

Brief. Well branched; a long open flower pale amparo purple to pale Hortense
violet, the haft sparsely reticulated brick red; styles very over-arching;
40 in.

Details. Fastigiate branching; S. overlapping, revolute; F. drooping to in¬
curved, a bit pinched; beard projecting, orange tipt.

Remarks. A misleading color reproduction brought sharp disappointment to
purchasers of an effective pale pink. Imperial Blush is of better form
and a bit paler. II. M. 1931.

PLUIE D’OR

Self Y4M Cayeux .28

3rief. High but widely branched; empire yellow deepening at haft; rd
conspicuous, orange; 3 ft.

Details. Foliage yellow green; S. arching, a bit cockled at times; F. droopi :
haft and styles narrow.

Remarks. Color of Gold Imperial but fades lighter and is larger. Excel it
garden effect. Dykes Medal, France 1928.

POLAR KING

(Moonlight x — )

Self W1 Donahue 1931-1934

Brief. Large; exceptional substance; white flushed a pale greenish yellow from
the center, the haft with widely spaced clear reticulations of olive yellow;
beard conspicuous, yellow; 3 ft.

Details. Stalk stout; S. arched, deeply notched; F. drooping; styles broad, the
keel yellowed.

Remarks. October bloom for at least two years in Mass. H. M. 1931, A. M.
1932.

PURISSIMA

(Argentina x Conquistador)

Self W1 Mohr-Mit. 1927

Brief. Very pure white, a few purple reticulations on the claw, a few blurred
veins on the haft; beard white; 3 ft.

Details. S. cupped, notched; F. rounded, drooping.

Remarks. Bloomed after a temperature of 20 below zero in New England,
1933-1934.

RAE

Self Y4L Lothrop 1930-1932

Brief. High but very widely branched; ivory yellow deepening to amber
yellow at center, the haft inconspicuously flecked maroon; beard conspicu¬
ous, orange; 3 ft.

[35]

Details. S. arched; F. flaring; the amber yellow reticulations on the haft stop
at end of beard; styles amber yellow, over-arching.

Remarks. B. M., Eedlands Show, 1930.

RAMESES

Bicolor, blend S9L Sass, Id. P. 1929

Brief. S. Beep olive buff to avellaneous; F. deeply flushed argyle purple, the
conspicuous haft strontian yellow; beard also conspicuous, orange; 40 in.

Details. Widely branched; S. arching, a bit floppy; F. drooping; styles, broad,
over-arching.

Remarks. H. M. 1931; Dykes Medal 1930.

RED DOMINION

(Dominion x Nancy Orne) x Dominion

Bicolor M-E9D Ayres 1928-1931

Brief. S. petunia violet; F. velvety dahlia purple fading to pansy violet, the
conspicuous haft closely veined a rich Morocco red; 30 in.

Details. Foliage slender; widely branched; not fragrant; S. erect to arching;
F. flaring; beard projecting, yellow-orange; styles narrow, erect, with wire
edge.

Remarks. Late flowering in Mass. Id. M. 1931.

RED FLARE

Bicolor, blend R9D Milliken 1932

Brief. S. vinaceous; F. velvety brilliant Bordeaux red, the conspicuous stron¬
tian yellow haft heavily reticulated Morocco red ; beard conspicuous,
orange; 42 in.

Details. Widely branched, below center; flower open; S. arching; F. drooping
to straight hanging; styles with lilac keel.

Remarks. H. M. 1931.

RED ROBE

Bicolor E9D Nichols 1930

Brief. S. Mathews purple; F. velvety dahlia purple to violet carmine, the con¬
spicuous white haft heavily reticulated Morocco red; beard conspicuous,
yellow ; 33 in.

Details. Short branched; S. arching; F. flaring to drooping, notched; styles
flushed brown.

Remarks. H. M. 1932.

ROB ROY

Bicolor S7M Kirkland 1928-1931

Brief. Short but widely branched; S. testaceous flushed Chinese violet, wire
edge; F. very velvety burnt lake flushed dahlia carmine, claw and haft
conspicuous citron yellow, the haft closely reticulated mahogany; beard
orange; 42 in.

Details. S. erect to arching; F. flaring; styles over-arching.

Remarks. Very rich effect.

ROSE ASH

(Impressario x Bruno)

Self, blend S7L Morrison-Sturt. 1930

Brief. Ijarge; deep vinaceous lavender deepening below beard; 32 in.

Details. Long and widely branched; S. over lapping; F. drooping.

ROSE DOMINION

(Sherbert x Cardinal)

Bicolor 'S7M Connell 1931

Brief. S. a warm magenta; F. velvety dahlia carmine fading at edge to ma¬
genta; haft conspicuous, cream, reticulated morocco red; 30 in.

[36]

Details. S. with tips adpressed ; F. horizontal, convex; beard sparse, projecting,
white.

Remarks. A slow grower of distinctive coloring. H. M. 1932.

ROYAL BEAUTY

Bicolor B7D McKee 1931

Brief. S. Bradley’s violet; F. velvety mulberry purple, the haft closely reticu¬
lated Hays russet, the conspicuous beard bluish, yellow tipt; 39 in.

Details. Fasti giate branching; S. arching, ruffled; F. drooping, waved; styles
erect.

Remarks. Type Souvenir de Mme. Gaudichau — richer. H. M. 1931; A. M. 1932.

SAN DIEGO

(Souv. de Mme. Gaudichau x El Capitan)

Bicolor B7M Mohr-Mit. 1928-1929

Brief. Large; Bradleys to dauphins violet, the conspicuously light haft widely
reticulated madder brown; 4 ft.

Details. Bather short branches; S. erect to arching, revolute; F. drooping,
satiny; beard bluish, orange tipt; styles over arching; crest toothed.
Remarks. H. M. 1931.

SELENE

Self W1 Connell 1928-1930

Brief. Foliage tinged at base; large, white, the falls flushed at beard with the
napthalene yellow of the haft; an oblong flower; 39 in.

Details. S. arching, creped, notched, ruffled; F. straight-hanging, occasionally
pinched beard projecting, white, yellow tipt.

Remarks. H. M. 1932.

SENORITA

Bicolor, blend S3L Mohr-Mit. 1928

Brief. Widely branched; S. center cream buff fading to ivory and flushed the
very pale lilac of the falls; F. with a deeper flush below beard of Hays
lilac; 3 ft.

Details. S. arching; F. flaring to drooping, pinched; beard projecting, yellow,
orange tipt; styles very over-arching, color of S.

Remarks. Color suggestive of the old Dalmarius.

SENSATION

Self B1M Cayeux 1925

Brief. High branched; light dull bluish lavender, the white haft conspicuous;
39 in.

Details. S. arching, a bit toother, smooth; F. flaring with drooping tips; beard
projecting, white, yellow tipt; styles erect.

Remarks. C. M., N. H. F. 1924-1926.

SHINING WATERS

[Caterina x Marian Mohr) x California Blue] x (Uncle Remus x Moa)

Self E-B1L Essig-Milliken 1932

Brief. Well and widely blanched; large, pale to wistaria violet, the inconspic¬
uous haft finely reticulated olive buff to russet; 4 ft.

Details. S. arching, smooth; F. flaring to drooping, satiny; beard coarse, white,
yellow tipt; styles over-arching.

Remarks. Early flowering in California.

SIERRA BLUE

Self BID Essig-Milliken 1930

Brief. Veiry well branched; large, wistaria violet, the inconspicuous haft clay
color; 4 ft.

Details. S. conic; F. flaring, a bit ruffled; beard, projecting, bluish, yellow tipt.
Remarks. Deeper and more of a self than Sensation.

[37]

SITKA

(Oriflamme x Conquistador) x Shasta

Self W1 Essig 1931

Brief. Large, the S. bluish in contrast to the creamy F. and blurred greenish
yellow reticulations of the haft; exceptional substance; 42 in.

Details. Very fragrant; S. open, revolute, toothed; F. flaring to drooping,
almost velvety; beard white, orange tipt; styles short, over-arching.
Remarks. A bit whiter in effect than Wambliska.

SONATA

(Shekinah x Lent A. Williamson)

Bicolor, blend S6L Williamson 1928-1929

Brief. S. cream buff ; F. lustrous, chamois flushed pale mauve, the conspicuous
haft citron yellow at edge, the beard very orange ; 3 ft.

Details. >S. arching, toothed, f rilled ; F. flaring to drooping, waved ; flower not
large.

Remarks. Color of Nepenthe.

SUNLIGHT

(Sarabande x Shekinah seedling)

Self Y4L Sturt. 1927-1929

Brief. Widely branched below center; napthalene yellow deepening to Pinard
yellow at center, of flower (center of F. lighter) the orange beard, thick
and broad, pointed at end; 39 in.

Details. S. domed; F. drooping with flaring tips; haft broad, conspicuous,
reticulations very faint; styles over-arching.

Remarks. H. M. Boston Show 1928.

SWEET ALIBI

(Mirasol x Purissima)

Self Y4L White, C. G.-Milliken 1933

Brief. Well-branched; massicot yellow flushed amber yellow through center;
3 ft.

Details. >S. arched, notched, frilled; F. flaring, convex; haft finely reticulated
citron yellow to rufous at center; beard orange.

Remarks. H. M. 1932. An even purer self than Yellow Moon.

TALISMAN

Bicolor, blend S6M Murrell 1930

Brief. Well but fastigiate branching; S. flushed amber yellow; F. flushed pale
rose purple, the color deepening at the tips of the segments; 30 in.

Details. S. arching, creped; F. drooping, notched; haft narrow; beard pro¬
jecting, yellow-orange; styles flushed, narrow.

Remarks. Color often streaky and uneven. C. M., R. H. S. 1930.

THISTLEDOWN

( — x San Francisco)

Plicata W2L Sturt. 1930-1932

Brief. High but widely branched; a full bloom, very faintly flushed lavender
violet; 39 in.

Details. S. with tips adpressed; F. drooping, ruffled, convex; beard projecting,
white, yellowy-orange tipt; styles erect.

Remarks. Effect a tinted white.

TOMMY TUCKER

Self M-Y4M Nesmith 1930-1931

Brief. Widely branched; an almost apricot yellow fading to palest baryta
yellow in the center of the fall; beard conspicuous, orange; styles project¬
ing, striking; 3 ft.

Details. S. doomed; F. flaring.

Remarks. Excellent garden effect.

[38]

VALOR

(Ambassadeur x Rubyd)

Bicolor R3D Nichols 1931-1932

Brief. S. dauphin violet ; F. velvety madder violet, the broad haft heavily
reticulated Morocco red, the conspicuous brown specked beard, orange; 3 ft.
Details. Branching rather short and fastigiate; S. domed, a bit frilled and
revolute; F. drooping, convex; styles broad, over-arching.

Remarks. Richer than Van Cleve. H. M. 1932.

VAN CLEVE

Bicolor BID Van Name 1926-1928

Brief. S. pleroma violet, wire edge; F. velvety dark madder violet, wire edge;
haft white ; 3 ft.

Details. S. overlapping; F. flaring with drooping tips; beard projecting,
bluish, yellow-orange tipt.

Remarks. H. M. New Haven 1926.

VENUS DE MILO

Kashmir White x (Loute x mesopotamica)

Self W1 Ayres 1931

Brief. Short but well-branched, below center; a large white with inconspicuous
pale lemon yellow reticulations on the haft and an orange tipt beard ; 40 in.
Details. S. arching, rather flat, a bit creped ; F. straight-hanging, convex,
oblong.

Remarks. H. M. 1932.

WAMBLISKA

Self W1 Sass, J. 1930

Brief. High branched; S. tinted bluish and very frilled; F. with inconspicuous
broken reticulations of deep olive buff to olive yellow; keel of styles
violet tinted ; 42 in.

Details. S. with prune purple reticulations on claw; F. flaring to drooping;

beard projecting, white, yellow-orange tipt.

Remarks. In cool weather almost a pale blue. H. M. 1931.

WEDGEWOOD

Self B1M Dykes 1923

Brief. High branched; a smooth Bradley’s violet throughout, the beard orange
and brown specked; 33 in.

Details. S. cupped, revolute; F. drooping to straight-hanging, notched; styles,
erect.

Remarks. A most effective garden plant.

W. R. DYKES

Self Y4M Dykes 1926

Brief. Large, long flower, baryta to % tone maize yellow with conspicuous
orange beard; 3 ft.

Details. Branching below center but fastigiate ; S. erect to arching, ruffled,
toothed, revolute; F. straight-hanging, a bit pinched, almost cockled in
texture; styles narrow, erect.

Remarks. Flower often marred by dark flecks.

ZAHAROON

Self S4L Dykes 1927

Brief. Flushed pale lilac vinaceous on a cream buff ground, the haft empire
yellow with heavy russet reticulations; beard orange; 40 in.

Details. S. arching, revolute; F. flaring to drooping; styles over-arching.
Remarks. It fades badly in hot weather; charming color as it opens. Silver
G. II. Medal, R. H. S. 1927.

[39]

INDEX TO VARIETIES DESCRIBED

■ The numbers given after the name refer to the Bulletin
wherein the descrition may be found. Nos. 6, 7, 9, 12, 29, and 53.

Abenda 29
Afterglow 6
Aksarben 7
Albert Victor 7
albicans 9
Alcazar 6
Alcina 53
Aliquippa 29
Allure 53
Alta California 53
Altiora 53
Amanullah 53
Amas 7
Ambassadeur 9
Ambigu 6
Angelo 9
Anna Farr 6
Anndelia 53
Anne Bullen 12
Anne Leslie 6
Ann Page 9
Antonio 12
Aphrodite 12
Archeveque 6
Argentina 12
Arlington 12
Armenien 9
Arnols 7
Asia 29
Asphodel 29
Athene 7
Atlas 7
Aurea 7
Aurifero 53
Aurora 9
Austin 12
Autocrat 9
Autumn Glow 29
Autumn King 29
Avalon 6
Avatar 29
Avondale 53
Azrael 29
Azure 6
Balboa 9
Baldur 29
Baldwin 53
Ballerine 9
Baronet 9
Barton Harrington 9
Beau Ideal 29
Belisaire 29

Benbow 6
Bertrand 29
Beryl 29
Black Prince 6
Black Wings 53
Blue and Gold 53
Blue Bird 9
Blue Jay 7
Blue June 53
Blue Lagoon 9
Bluet 9
Bolingbroke 29
Boyer 29
Brandywine 12
Brionense 9
Bronze Beacon 53
Bruno 12
Buechleys Giant 53
Burmah 53
B. Y. Morrison 6
California Gold 53
Cameliard 29
Cameo 12
Candlelight 29
Canopus 6
Caporal 12
Caprice 7
Carcanet 29
Cardinal 6
Carmelo 9
Carnation 29
Caroline E. Stringer 29
Catalosa 12
Caterina 6
Cavalier 12
Cecil Minturn 9
Celeste 7
Chalice 12
Chartier 29
Chatelet 12
Cherubin 12
Chester J. Hunt 7
Chlorinda 6
Cinnabar 53
Circe 7
Citronella 6
Clara Noyes 53
Claude Aureau 53
Clematis 7
Cluny 9
Col. Candelot 6
Commodore 12

Conquistador 9
Coppersmith 53
Cordelia 7
Cordon Bleu 7
Cornuault 29
Coronation 53
Corrida 6
Cretonne 6
Crimson King 7
Crusader 6
Cygnet 6
cyprian a 6
Dalila 6
Dalmarius 7
Daniel Leseur 12
Daphne 12
Darius 7
Dauntless 53
Dawn 9
Day Dream 53
Dejazet 9
Delicatissima 6
Delight 29
Desert Gold 53
Dominion 6
Dora Longdon 6
Dorman 7
Dorothy Dietz 53
Doxa 53
Drake 7
Dr. Bernice 7
Dream 6
Dreamlight 7
Duart 53
Du Guesclin 6
Duke of Bedford 6
Duke of York 12
Dusk 6

Easter Morn 53
Eckesachs 9
Edgewood 29
Edith Cavell 12
Edouard Michel 6
Eglamour 12
E. H. Jenkins 9
Elaine 12
El Capitan 29
E. L. Crandall 9
Eldorado 7
Elinor 7

Elinor Blossom 12
Elizabeth Egelberg 53

[40]

Elsinore 29
Ember 12
Emir 9
Empire 7

Empress of India 12
Endymion 29
Ensign 7
Eros 53
Esplendido 12
Evadne 29
Fairy 6
Fantasy 7
Fedora 12
Feldspar 29
Fenella 7
Feronia 12
Flamingo 53
Flammensewert 9
Flavescens 6
Florentina 6
Flutterby 12
Fontarabie 7
Francina 7
Frank M. Thomas 9
Fro 7

Fryers Glory 9
Gabriel 12
Garnet 29
Gen. Gallieni 29
Geo. J. Tribolet 29
Georgia 9
germanica 7
Ghandi 29
Glamour 12
Gloire de Hillegon 7
Glowing Embers 9
Gnome 9
Golderest 7
Gold Imperial 12
Goliath 9
Gov. Hughes 7
Gracchus 7
Grace Sturtevant 29
Gudrun 53
Gules 7
Halo 6

Happy Days 53
Harriet Presby 6
Hautefeuille 9
Hebe 9
Helios 53
Her Majesty 7
Hermia 12
Hermione 12
Hermitage 53
Hermosa 12
Hesperia 29
Hiawatha 9

Hilda 7
Hippolyta 12
Hollywood 53
Honorabile 7
Horizon 29
Hubert (M) 12

Issan 9
Imperator 12
Imperial Blush 53
Inner Glow 29
Innocenza 7
Iris King 7
Ishtar 29
Isoline 6
Ivanhoe 6
Jacinto 29
Jacqueline Guillot 12
Jacquesiana 6
Jadu 53
James Boyd 9
Japanesque 9
J. B. Dumas 12
JEB Stuart 53
Jean Chevreau 12
Joy a 6
Jubilee 29
Juniata 6
Kalif 29
Ivaragdah 53
Kashmir White 6
Kathryn Fryer 9
Katrinka 7
Kestrel 6
Ivharput 7
King Juba 53
King George 9
King Karl 29
King Phillip 53
King Tut 53
Klamath 53
Kochi 7
Kurdistan 12
Lady Chas. Allom 12
Lady Foster 6
Lady Jellicoe 12
L’Aiglon 12
Lamia 29
La Neige 6
Laura E. Sturtevant 9
Leander 12
Lent A. Williamson 6
Leonato 12
Leonidas 9
Leverrier 6
Lewis Trowbridge 9
Lindbergh 53
Lodestar 29
Lohengrin 6

[41]

Lona 29
Lord of June 6
Loreley 7
Los Angeles 53
Loudoun 12
Louis Bel 29
Lurline 7
Madison Cooper 9
Mady Carriere 9
Magnate 7
Magnifica 9
Magnificent 12
Majestic 7
Ma Mie 6
Mandelay 7
Mandraliscae 9
Maori King 7
Mardi 53
Margaret Moor 7
Marian Mohr 9
Mariposa 12
Marsh Marigold 9
Mary Garden 7
Mary Geddes 53
Mary Gray 7
Mary Orth 9
Mary Williamson 9
Massaoit 9
Mauvine 9
May Morn 9
May Rose 9
Medrano 12
Meldoric 53
Melrose 29
Mentor 12
Mercedes 6
Merlin 6
mesopotamica 6
Micheline Charraire 29
Midgard 53
Midwest 7
Mildred Presby 12
Milky Way 29
Minniehaha 9
Miranda 7
Miss Willmott 7
Mistress Ford 12
Mithras 9
Mile. Schwartz 6
Mine. Boullet 9
Mme. Cecile
Bouscant 29
Mme. Chereau 6
Mme. Cheri 6
Mme. Chobaut 6
Mme. Claude Monet 12
Mme. Denis 7
Mme. de Sevigne 7

Mme. Durrande 12
Mme. Louesse 9
Moa 6
Moliere 9
Monsignor 6
Montezuma 6
Montour 29
Montserrat 7
Moon Magic 53
Morning Splendor 6
Mort Sanford 9
Morwell 6
Mother of Pearl 6
Motif 53
Mount Penn 6
Mrs. Alan Gray 6
Mrs. Cowley 9
Mrs. Fryer 9
Mrs. Haw 12
Mrs. Hetty Matson 12
Mrs. Horace Darwin 6
Mrs. J. S. Brand 9
(Mrs.) Marion Cran 12
Mrs. Neubronner 7
Mrs. Ryder 12
Mrs. Stern 12
Mrs. Tinley 9
Mrs. Valerie West 53
Mrs. W. J. Fryer 9
My Lady 29
Myth 9
Nancy Orne 6
Nathalis 29
Natividad 53
Naushon 9
Navajo 9
Nepenthe 53
Neptune 6
New Albion 53
Nibelungen 7
Nimbus 6
Nine Wells 6
Nirvana 7
Nuee d’Orage 7
Nusku 53
Ochracea 9
Odoratissima 9
Old Ivory 29
Olivia 9

Oliver Pertlmis 12
Olympus 29
Onnoris 6
Opal Dawn 53
Opera 9
Oporto 9
Oriental 9
Oriflamme 7
Osprey 53

Our King 7
Pacific 53
Pale Moonlight 53
Pancroft 7
Pandora 7
Parc de Neuilly 6
Parisiana 7
Parma 53
Parthenon 53
Patrician 12
Pauline 9
Pearl Blue 29
Peau Rouge 12
Pendragon 29
Perfection 7
Perladonna 12
Perrys Favorite 9
Petit Vitry 9
Petrel 12
Petrucchio 29
Phyllis Bliss 9
Picador 53
Pink Jadu 53
Pink Pearl 9
Pink Satin 53
Pioneer 29
Pluie d’Or 53
Pocahontas 7
Polar King 53
Polaris 7
Porcelain 9
Powhattan 9
Prestige 7
Primavera 29
Primrose 12
Prince Charming 29
Prince Lohengrin 9
Princess Beatrice 6
Princess Osra 12
Princess Royal 7
Princess Victoria
Louise 7
Prof. Seeliger 9
Prosper Laugier 6
Prospero 9
Purissima 53
Purple and Gold 7
Purple Lace 7
Quaker Lady 6
Queen Alexandra 9
Queen Caterina 6
Queen Elinor 7
Queen of May 7
Rachel Fox 9
Rae 53
Raffet 12
Rameses 53
Ramona 9

Red Admiral 29
Red Cloud 9
Red Dominion 53
Red Flare 53
Red Robe 53
Regan 12
Reverie 6
Rheingauperle 29
Rhein Nixe 6
Rhoda 9
Rialgar 29
Richard 11 7

Ringdove 9
Rob Roy 53
Robert W. Wallace 12
Rodney 6
Romany 9
Romeo 6
Romola 29
Rosado 29
Rosalind 9
Rose Ash 53
Rose Dominion 53
Rose Madder 6
Rose Unique 9
Rose Salterne 12
Roseway 9
Rotorua 12
Royal Beauty 53
Rubyd 29
Ruth Rand 9
Salonique 29
Samite 7
San Diego 53
San Francisco 29
San Gabriel 12
Santa Barbara 29
Sapphid 29
Sarabande 7
Sarpedon 6
Saul 12
Sea Foam 29
Sea Gull 12
Selene 53
Seminole 9
Senonta 53
Sensation 53
Sequoiah 12
Shalimar 7
Shekinah 6
Shelford Chieftain 9
Sherbert 6
Sherwin Wright 7
'Shining Waters 53
Shrewsbury 7
Sierra Blue 53
Silverdale 9
Silver Mist 12

[42]

Silvia 9

Simone Vaissiere 12
Sindjklia 7
Sitka 53
Snow White 29
Solana 12
Soledad 9
Sonata 53
Sophronia 29
Souv. de Loetita

Michaud 12
Souv. de Mine.

Gaudichau 6
Speed 12
Stamboul 6
Stanley H. White 6
Steep way 9
Sudan 9
Sunlight 53
Susan Bliss 6
Suzanne Autissier 12
Swatra 12
Swazi 6
Sweet Alibi 53
Sweet Lavender 9
Syphax 9
Taffeta 12
Taj Mahal 6
Talisman 53
Tamar 7
Tamerlan 9

Tancred 29
Tartarin 7
Tenebrae 7
Thelma Perry 9
Thistledown 53
Thorbeck 7
Timur 29
Tintallion 29
Titan 6

Tommy Tucker 53
Tom Tit 9
Tregastel 9
Trianon 12
Trinidad 9
Tristram 9
Troades 12
trojana 6
Troost 9
Tropic Seas 12
True Charm 29
Turco 12
Twin Larches 9
Tyrian 6
Ute Chief 9
Valery Mayet 9
Valkyrie 6
Valor 53
Van Cleve 53
Vanessa 12
Vesper Gold 29
Venus de Milo 53

Victorine 7
Viking 12
Viola 9

Violacea Grandiflora 7
Virginia Moore 6
Volumina 29
Wambliska 53
Wedgewood 53
White and Gold 29
White Knight 6
White Queen 29
White Star 29
Wild Rose 6
William Marshall 9
Windham 9
W. J. Fryer 6
Woodland 29
W. R. Dykes 53
Wyomissing 9
Yellow Hammer 12
Yellow Moon 9
Yeoman 12
Yolande 12
Yvonne Pellettier 12
Zada 29
Zaharoon 53
Zua 7
Zouave 12
ZuZu 7
Zwanenberg 29

"SERVANT OF THE RAINBOW”

Ethel Anson S. Peckham

■ Usually writers begin their remarks on irises with reference
to the name, to the legends or to the history of the plant, so it will
not be out of place if I recount some of the things I have discovered
during a three-year research into the origin of the Fleur de Lys and
its connection with the iris.

As a result of this work I am now convinced that this symbol is
one of those relating to immortality or eternity and, while I can¬
not go into detail of the proofs in so short an article, I can prove
what I am going to say and intend to publish the proofs at a fu¬
ture date.

There are numerous theories about the origin of the Fleur de Lys
symbol and it is possible that more than one has its roots reaching
far back to fact, as is the case in relation to all symbols that are
extremely ancient. Confusion results from origins that are earlier
than actual recorded history being embroidered with new legends
by each succeeding user of the symbol so as to fit it to the exi¬
gencies of the times. This, naturally, forces the investigator to
take certain principles connected with the symbol as guides and,
where these are retained and crop up in old religions, beliefs,
legends, superstitions or history as used with the symbol, he
grasps the essential part of the pattern, adding it to what he has
accumulated from other sources. Thus the finished theory rises
before him as the lost masterpiece of a great painter comes slowly
forward under the hands of the expert restorer when he carefully
removes layers of dirt and paint.

The iris is a plant perfectly fitted by its construction for use
as a badge or emblem in connection with any religious or political
purpose. The parabolic method of “getting over to an audience’ ’
the especial desire of a government or church is still in use where
the people to be enlightened are considered of low intelligence or
small education. It was resorted to almost entirely in old days and
its only alternative then was a free use of the lash or the sword.
The iris, being made all in threes and with a sword-sliaped leaf
was an ideal plant for comparison. People often wonder about the
“superstition of three” and why this recurring authoritative
symbol is three-parted but that is a simple matter. It represents

[44]

religion, the state, the people ; heaven, earth, man and so on
through the ages. Faith, hope and loyalty (to the government)
translated later by some into charity because the people had to be
made to give.

Among the stories about the Fleur de Lys we have been told that
someone said that instead of the Lil ies of France really being lilies,
they were irises and that the insignia was taken from Iris pseuda-
corus, the wild yellow iris of Europe which grows in such abun¬
dance along the river Lys in northern France. That the blue back¬
ground of this banner beset with golden “lilies” was taken from
the very blue sky of that region is another explanation, but the
people who quote all this do not know who first said it, nor can
they give any proof. However, I possess an ancient book, few
copies of which exist, in which there is an erudite dissertation to
prove that the Fleur de Lys is an iris and the author, being an
expert antiquarian and a numismatist, was able to prove his point,
partly through reference to ancient coins and partly through an¬
cient objects excavated during his time and which he identified.
He exploded many of the religious legends which are still being
bandied about by writers and he did it in a scholarly way.

Starting with the clues given me by this man, I have come upon
many exciting and thrilling things and my research path has ‘led
me, via religion associated with governmental authority, from
French history back through early Gaul in Roman times to Greek,
Egyptian, Persian (with the allied Indian beliefs) to Serpent
Worship. This I consider the source of the symbol: Serpent
Worship.

It is well known that in the thirteenth century (1272) the city
of Florence had the iris as its official flower and that the gold
coins issued at that time of such superb workmanship and called
“Florins” had the Fleur de Lys in one of its most elaborate phases
on the reverse.

Clovis, reported to be the first Christian king of France, was by
many people supposed to be the first, to carry the Fleur de Lys
insignia. He is said to have received it at the hands of St. Remi,
bishop of what is now Rheims, after a great battle where Clovis
had conquered the Roman forces and literally possessed himself of
his own country. It was the final defeat of the Romans in Gaul.
Church legends say St. Remi baptized the king on the battlefield
adding charmingly picturesque details of angels bringing him from

[45]

Heaven the banner or shield with new device ! We do know his
wife had long been a Christian but I very much doubt that
Clovis became one because he was most certainly buried with all
the paraphernalia of pagan religion as witness the objects found
in his tomb. They show that he was probably buried with the
same ceremonies as were used in Greco-Egyptian times. It has
always been a convenient method of priests of all religions thus
to arrange for changes in governments and customs of peoples.

It seems fairly certain that Clovis adopted the symbol of author¬
ity carried by the Roman commander. The Roman Curule Aediles
used this three-shaped symbol to show their authority. In most
cases the Proconsul for Gaul was a Curule Aedile as Gaul was an
important part of the Republic or Empire and to be a Curule
Aedile was almost the highest position to be obtained. Indeed, it
was the second highest in all Rome. These men were important
because the grain crop was in their control (they were responsible
for it and on it the army moved) that and the tribute of animals.
After conquering a country the first thing the Romans did was to
fix tribute of grain and animals. I have found that the symbol
of authority of greatest importance is that connected with the
economic condition of the country studied, the most necessary
plant, etc. So the same symbol, always carrying with it the same
background of tradition of authority will be used but the plant
will vary according to the country and times.

The temple of Ceres, the goddess of the crops, was under the
care of these Aediles and this goddess was prominent among Roman
deities long before they imported Greek divinities. In Roane Ceres
and Hope (Spes) were closely allied, as why should they not be?
The three-leaved symbol was known as a “sprout” of grain just
beginning to grow (the resurrection of life) and often depicted
outheld in their hands. On coins intended for paying the army
we find Hope giving this sprout to three soldiers of the legions
about to start on an expedition to regain Gaul and you may notice
one of the men making the same symbol with his fingers, pointing
one to the sky and the other two to the ground. Here the symbol
is used as a promise of reward for somebody even should they
lose their lives and I cannot help thinking that it here shows its
relation to the various religions better than in any other place
in which we encounter it.

We stand, then, in Rome at the cross-roads in our search, and

[46]

COINS SHOWING (LEFT) THE CURULE AEDILES AND (EIGHT)
HOPE PRESENTING THE “SPROUT” TO WARRIORS.

can look in all directions, through Gaul and the middle ages to
present day church festivals and popular superstitions; ‘‘up coun¬
try” towards Roman and Etruscan origins; towards Greece, Egypt
and the Far East, and last, and by far not the least, south towards
Africa.

The medieval story of Seth at the gate of Heaven being given
the three-leaved symbol of immortality taken from the Tree of
Life as a promise that although he could not enter at that time
he should eventually enter into eternal life has its parallel in all
the ceremonies and legends connected with life whether of plahts
or humans. A picture in an early book shows this symbol as almost
identical with some of those on Roman coins. On the coins of
Marcus Antonius as Triumvir for Egypt the crocodile (Egypt)
is shown in chains fastened to a palm tree which is divided into
three parts in this same manner. In early Sicilian coins reapers are
depicted always cutting three ears in a sheaf and on some coins
wings are on the sides of the sheaf making it look like the staff
of authority as we know it in the caduceus of Hermes. If you will
glance at, the Fleur de Lys you will see it could ea*s 1^^ "be a, sli af y
tied below the middle. On a gem Floras is seen holding a spray
that looks like iris and in the other hand the sickle of exact pattern

[47 1

COINS (LEFT) OF MARCUS ANTONIUS AS TRIUMVIR OF EGYPT
AND (RIGHT) SICILIAN REAPER CUTTING THREE EARS IN SHEAF.

used by the Romans. This is shaped something like the English
bill-hook used today and is in three curved parts like the ensiform
leaves of such irises as 1. aphylla.

Taking the country road we encounter Numa Pompilius, a re¬
ligious, wise and peaceful person, consulting a country oracle.
Whenever the people became obstreperous he asked for time to
consult his oracle and after the first excitement had blown over
he returned with good advice and in this way “kept his country
out of war.” While he got advice from a “nymph,” his power
was supposed to have been acquired from a shield (a round buckler)
which fell from heaven. The significant part of the story of Numa
is the round shield sent from the gods. Here is a suggestion of
the later shield or banner of Clovis. The Romans used round
bucklers with a boss in the centre. Nowadays we realize that dates
in very early “history” are flexible and that personages in history
stand out. There may have been long spaces of unimportant history
between the different items of what has been passed down to us by
word of mouth making the earliest bits of what seem to be fact
recede to a time far earlier than we ordinarily think of them as
having taken place. It is more than likely that the shape of the
shields of the Romans and the Greeks was handed down along

[48]

with early religious tradition. Continuing up the country road and
taking a peep at the Etruscan cinerary urns we note they are
made in the form of huts with a wide-eaved roof and along the
ridge are set at intervals and in pairs, horns. We wonder why, and
file this for future use.

Now, let us go back to Rome and betake ourselves to the market¬
place for vegetables and country produce where stands the great
temple of Ceres. Here we note many of the same things going on
we see in our own country today. Notices on a bulletin board,
namely fastened up on the temple, notices of prices of the vege¬
tables, meetings of the farmers, of officials, of festivals, of in¬
instruction upon growing crops, notices of a dole of grain to be
given out to worthy citizens at a time of famine. A dole to be
given to those who could show a badge or token that entitled them
to the specified amount the state, as represented by the Curule
Aediles, had decided to give that year. What were these corn
tokens like? They were round with a boss in the middle whereas
those that were a sort of annual pass to certain seats in the
theatre were of entirely different shapes. In fact these grain
tokens were almost exact representations of a buckler !

Going about our business in ancient Rome, coins showing on
reverse two Curule Aediles flanked by tubs each containing three
ears of grain arranged like the Fleur de Lys with centre one erect
and the side ears bending down in a curve, might be exchanged by
us for any household commodity. Or, perhaps be given in offering
at a temple and, should we decide to visit the great temple of
the Thundering Jove, before we pass beneath its portals we might
glance up and see above us, carved in high relief, the head of a bull
with outspread horns and garlanded for death, some knives to
despatch him, a torch to light his pyre, and ewer to hold the wine
and a round dish with a raised centre to catch his blood. We at once
see the close resemblance between this dish and the Roman shield.
Looking to right and left on the capitols of the magnificently or¬
nate Corinthian columns we see acanthus leaves, radiating into
torch-like terminals which end again in two liorn-like, spreading
ornaments, while between them is the exact counterpart of a
Fleur de Lys without the tie-band across the lower part ! Part
of this temple stands today and I have seen this signpost of the
crossroads for I ask you to compare church brass or silver com¬
munion services throughout the Christian world with this dish
and ewer.

[49]

There is little in Roman times to connect the Fleur de Lys sym-
bol with iris. This period is a good illustration of religion with its
old paraphernalia being made subservient to the uses of the state
and the adoption of the divine right of authority by the emperors
with the obligatory sacrifice to them is an example. The thundering
Jupiter who would bring trouble upon the land if the people
did not behave themselves and who needed to be placated was all
important at one period and in the implements used for the sacri¬
fices to him we easily see a close resemblance to everything used,
even including the necessary animal (bull or ox, often and generally
black) to the things depicted as in ceremonial use in earlier re¬
ligions and to the sacrificial black bull of present day Serpent
Worship. Surprising as it may be, Serpent Worship is still being
practised in some places in Africa today in the identical manner
of the earliest times.

Again looking at the bull’s head and the garland of death we start
upon our journey towards the east taking with us our three-leaved
symbol and the round dish or shield and not forgetting the Etruscan
horns on roof ridge. Looking about us in Greco-Egyptian times we
find the sacrificial animals garlanded with special flowers to honor
particular dieties. We know that these plants or flowers might
vary according to what was obtainable though they would often
retain the name of the plant originally thought most necessary to
please the god. This happens today when pussy-willows are called
*c palms” and used in some Irish country churches at Easter time
and did also forty years ago in the north of England when pussy¬
willow “ palms” were always considered a part of a correct Easter
decoration. The principal ceremonies in conjunction with fertility
festivals represent the descent into the ground of the plants to
live there through the darkness and cold of winter, returning again
to life in springtime. In Greece and Egypt the Orpheus and
Eurydice legend the story of the going and returning of Persephone
and the worship of Osiris are what interest us for they are closely
affiliated with the ceremonies of Serpent Worship and also with
those of the festivals of Ceres and Demeter, the Greek Ceres. The
iris was used in these festivals in Egypt and its use probably be¬
came submerged in later times under that of laurel and other
plants easier to obtain at several times of the year. Perhaps it is
easier to realize that there was a definite use of iris at funerals if we
remember that Arabs carried iris to plant on graves and it is known
to be a very old custom, so much so that the distribution of some

[50]

varieties has been attributed to it. The custom is not obsolete, either,
as white iris is still known as " graveyard iris” in Louisiana and
Texas. Receiving some from the latter state I was electrified to
find it was the true I. albicans!

However, now we have reached Greece and Egypt we can make
the acquaintance of Iris, one of the messengers of the gods. She rep¬
resents the rainbow, that emblem of promise of the gods. Rain
having come to give us crops the rainbow shows us it will stop
before there is too much, likely to ruin them. The rainbow was like
a bridge between Heaven and earth and so it is easy to see how it
could bring a message. This is entirely analogous with Serpent
Worship for the Great Python is the rainbow, he sends the good and
beneficent rain, it is he that is responsible for all fertility. He
shows in the bend of his lithe presentiment in the sky his promise of
good things to come. One does not deal with this Great Python
directly, one does it through the head man or high priest, and going
back very far on this line, the discovery is made that the head man
or chief has his tent marked with a pole or staff upon which is tied a
pair of horns in which combination we can quickly recognize the
likeness of our Fleur de Lys emblem. For here is the centre erect
piece (the head of the spear or staff) and the horns, pointing to
the ground, make the two other curving pieces while the tieing
material makes the crossband like that of the French "lily.” A
present day custom in Egypt is to, tie a pair of horns on the sides
of date palms and the natives will tell you it is to keep off evil
spirits and that it makes the trees bear more and better fruit ! Horns
are very efficacious in keeping off the evil-eye and the position of
the hand where the thumb, second and third fingers are held down
while the first and little fingers make a pair of horns is familiar to
most as a sure preventative measure during such danger!

The connection between iris and the rainbow has more ramifica¬
tions than the usual explanation that the plant was so named be¬
cause of its many colors. We are so rapt in the colors of the rainbow
that we forget the significance of its message and it is Iris as one
of the messengers of the gods that concerns us. She is the promise
of better things, the fender off of evil. In Korea the iris is known
as 1 1 Servant of the Rainbow ’ ’ which title covers really all the rela¬
tions of the Fleur de Lys with Iris and iris with immortality or
fertility. We saw the Thundering Jove (Giove Tonante) whose
principal symbol is generally the sheaf of lightning bolts, and we
noted our Fleur de Lys upon his temple and we know that sacrifices

[51]

were made to him to assuage his anger so he would not send a
tempest with, terrific rain and lightning to destroy everything and
if we were to go now to some parts of Hungary we would find iris
planted along the ridges of the roofs “to keep off lightning!” In
Normandy, also iris is planted on the roofs, always on the ridge and,
although the peasants have no knowledge of the reason for it except
that “it is the custom, ’ ’ it probably is a survival from the old re¬
ligion. In Spain, too, iris is tied on the balconies during a summer
church festival “to keep off lightning” and in many lands it is still
the custom to tie a bush at the highest point when building a house
and the roof ridge is set. The Spanish festival corresponds with the
time of an old Roman crop festival, St. John’s eve, when in folk
lore of many countries fairies are abroad and bad spirits are about.
If you look at one side of an original Florin you will see the Fleur
de Lys and on the other is St. John the Baptist ! I noticed in Quebec
that on St. John’s Day all the houses were decorated with bushes
tied on the fronts or on balconies or above the front door. And so
the messenger of the gods still is busy though sometimes a proxy
plant does the work.

I think the horns on the roofs of the Etruscan huts were put
there to fend off the evil spirits and, as they were most certainly
pairs of ox or bull horns it seems as if there must be a derivation
from the same burial and propitiating customs. The fact that they
are placed on the ridge exactly as the iris plants is interesting.
The iris plants serve a utilitarian purpose in that a thatched roof
leaks at the join and plants will help to close the gaps. The horns
might act as lightning rods! Perhaps the first Etruscan to so dec¬
orate his house had that in mind and amused himself by “stuffing”
curious neighbors, telling them he was propitiating the gods. Or
maybe the iris plants are put up there by the Hungarians ostensibly
to stop the leaks but in their heart of hearts they know they are
sending a message, a sort of “white flag,” to a violent old diety !
It is a significant thing that in Hungary the planting of the crops
in springtime is accompanied with ceremonies closely allied to
those of Serpent Worship and that at the same time the grain is
planted in the fields a few kernels are put in the eaves of the
roof and if they grow the crops are sure to be a success !

So we perceive how closely interwoven are all these beliefs and
parabolic ceremonies and how wide and long we must journey to
grasp the full meaning of a row of iris plants growing on a house

[52]

whether it be in Japan, Hungary or France and while there appear
to be wide gaps in my reasoning I only ask you to remember that it
is always the most important diety of a religion who gives the great¬
est gift. It would be too much to try here to go into detail but
should suffice to say that Jupiter (Zeus), Indra, the Great Python
and even the wicked witches of folklore whom the heroes have to
circumvent and who pursue him with tempest and lightning had
always the greatest gift in their keeping— immortality.

And I hope that through my removing a little paint here and
there, brightening that spot and so on, you will be able for your¬
selves to get a picture of the Fleur de Lys which, while you are
looking upon it, will slowly dissolve into an iris and thinking of
all its meaning of power, faith and persistence get some small part
of that message that is meant for each one of us.

Sterlington, N. Y.

A REGIONAL REPORT— 1934

J. Marion Shull

■ Without knowing the precise metes and bounds of a Regional
Vice-President’s duties toward the A. I. S., I nevertheless gather
that from each is expected something in the way of a report for the
year. Unfortunately, the region centering about Washington, D.
C., suffered rather severely in the matter of Iris interests during the
year just past. First came the loss of the late Homer C. Skeels,
whose exceptional collection of the Morrison productions in addition
to many others enabled him always to make a major contribution
to any Iris show within reach. He was not only able to exhibit
many varieties but these were wTell grown and his displays were in¬
variably of high quality. This year both the local Iris show of the
Takoma Horticultural Society, Takoma Park, Md., and that of the
National Capital Dahlia and Iris Society, of Washington, D. C.,
missed his usual contribution. The N. C. D. & I. S. was further
handicapped by the fact that almost at the last moment word came
that Mr. Sheets of Treholme Gardens, College Park, Md., would
not be able to display his hundreds of varieties as heretofore.

[53]

Mr. Sheets has presumably the largest collection in the East,
south of New York, and possibly the largest without such exception,
plus an unbounded enthusiasm for the Iris, but he was already a
very busy member of the Professional Staff of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture and as if this in itself were not a sufficiently man-
sized job, when the drouth situation became acute he was chosen
to administer Federal drouth relief, a burden of responsibility
that left no loose ends of time even to think about his Iris hobby.
Under these circumstances the Iris show staggered a bit but pulled
itself together and put on a really creditable display.

A few new seedlings were entered by local breeders. One of
these breeders, Dr. Clias. W. Ayars of Takoma Park, Md., presented
a splendid stalk of his Ethel Guill, a very large blend of the type
of My Maryland (Sheets), which would surely merit an II. M. un¬
less because of too great similarity to the latter. Dr. Ayars plans
to grow it side by side with My Maryland for a closer comparison.
He also displayed an ochraceous yellow that seemed quite promising.

Mr. Simmons again exhibited his Midnight Skies, a fine dark blue-
purple, not so intense quite as Meldoric (Ayres) or Purple Glory
(Piper) but a flower of fine form.

None of the newest western yellows appeared in the show but
the finest single stalk of the exhibition happened to be a well-grown
stem of Pluie d’Or (Cay.), about 3 feet tall, 10 buds, and with 3
splendid flowers open. As shown here I have seen no yellow yet to ex¬
cel it, notwithstanding that I have never succeeded in growing it
that well in my own garden. Last year a similarly fine stalk of
Dune Sprite held this premier position.

How many Iris shows were held in this region this year I do
not know for my own freedom of movement was somewhat ham¬
pered during the blooming period. I did, however, make several
special visits to the Sheets collection at College Park, where I
found a splendid display of bloom, but it so happened that many
of the most interesting of the new varieties represented there had
been completely reset the year before or had been depleted in the
course of commercial operations so that in many cases bloom was
obviously not typical. Many could not be fairly rated for this
reason, but the comment in my notebook made at the time, may
prove of vsome interest.

It may be more honest than polite to confess to some of these
notes, since I have already acknowledged myself incapable of rating

[54]

anything at 100 and have never seen or produced anything in which
some added grace or perfection would not have been welcome. I
have friends to whom every fine Iris is for the moment the ‘‘finest
Iris in the world,” but not being so constituted myself, I find it
hard to bestow unstinted praise in the manner of these enthusiasts
but, to satisfy my own ego, let us say, must do the unkind thing of
mentioning the deficiencies also. It is a thankless task, of course,
and admittedly the simon-pure enthusiast is the happier individual
and I envy him, but this just didn’t happen to be my heritage. Any¬
how, if judgments differ there is always “regional behavior” to
blame it on !

Here, then, are some of the heretical comments with which my
notebook of last May confronts me in the middle of August :

Allure (Murr. ) — washed-out.

Alta California (M-M) — light, but nice; yellow standards. Falls
not quite so good, too large in relation to standards.

Andrew Jackson (Kirk.) — long, relatively narrow falls; not
pleasingly proportioned. Throat color not pleasing.

Blue Monarch (Sass)— somewhat lacking in substance.

Blue Torch (Sheets) — fades from dark to light on the falls, al¬
ways an unsatisfactory color scheme. Flowers tend to bunch.

Giant King (Sass) — while taller and more vigorous, the flower is
by no means as fine as in Iris King. Substance only medium and
there is much too much white at the throat for best appearance, and
the flowers are too bunched.

King Juba (Sass) — fine large bright variegata. Chief fault too
much bunching of flowers at top of stem.

Largo (Ashley) — soft color but rather too weak and washed-out.
(Perhaps due to Washington climate in 1934.)

Meldoric (Ayres)— while very dark, is probably difficult to
grow and bloom well. Falls tend to roll up instead of spreading
flat. Perhaps all these very dark things should be growin only at
the North or in partial shade of buildings. The dark surfaces
absorb so much heat that in extreme sunny weather they shrivel
in a few hours.

Nanook (Ayres)— fine opaque white with warmth at throat;
well branched ; falls could be broader to advantage.

Nene (Cay.) — large but rather loosely built.

Ningal (Ayres) — color delicate, hardly positive enough. Falls
rather narrow. Hardly outstanding as indicated by the one good

stalk in evidence at College Park, but may not have been sufficiently
well represented.

Purple Glory (Piper) — a little more red-purple than Blue Vel¬
vet (Loomis), and a slightly better flower for richness and depth
of color. Does not fade at margin. Not quite as deep as Meldorie
but better carriage of its wider falls. Beard not quite as rich
as in Meldorie.

Rameses (Sasst) — seen for the first time in quantity and a bit dis¬
appointing. Perhaps Dykes Medal publicity tends to make one ex¬
pect too much. Substance not good ; form not exceptionally good.
General color as in Midgard and Mary Geddes. (Have we not per¬
haps overdone this type for the moment?) Larger but not as fine
form as Midgard. Personally I consider Williamson’s Opaline
superior.

Rosakura (Williamson) — fine red velvety falls with lighter
margin.

Rose Dominion (Conn.) — is a lovely rose color, of the usual flar¬
ing Dominion type. One stalk seen is short and inadequate to
judge of its garden value.

Sachem (Loomis) — falls relatively narrow and flowers too much
bunched at the top. Standards not as yellow as in Beau Sabreur
(Williamson) and the latter much the superior flower. Tiger-Tiger
(Wareham) much the same color but greatly richer and finer finish.
Sachem about intermediate between Tiger-Tiger and Rob Roy
(Kirk.) but Rob Roy the better stalk.

Theodolinda (Ayres) — large but a bit loose in its make-up.

Tiger-Tiger (Wareham) — an exceedingly rich flower in its color,
generally red to yellow-brown. A much more highly finished flower
than Sachem.

Among the Sheets seedlings are several that may prove fine for
garden mass, notably a white, 6B, and a yellow, 11B. The latter is
not particularly pleasing as to form but is a beautiful color and
apparently free-flowering. He has a larger flowered yellow, IB,
with a very rich beard, but this plant bunches its flowers rather too
closely. Ilis 11 A, obviously of Loudoun parentage, possesses con¬
siderable novelty value. The nearly white falls are yellow at throat
with a parted area of fine purple frecking forking outward from
each side of the beard, in this respect quite unlike anything I have
ever seen.

I regret that my Iris wanderings could not extend farther

[56]

afield this year but several gardens in this locality reported that
they had nothing worth going over critically, so there is nothing
left but a brief comment on my own garden which, in spite of the bad
winter, with the destruction of flower buds on some new arrivals,
gave a rather better than usual account of itself, due largely to
the presence in some quantity of the lighter colors represented by
Moon Magic, Phosphor, Dune Sprite, Waterfall, and my yellow-
white bicolor, Sylvia Lent. Masses of these served as an efficient foil
for the prevailingly darker colors of former years. Helping also
were such lovely things as Morrison’s Sophronia, Williamson’s
Opaline, and a smaller clump of Miss Sturtevant’s Ambrosia which
I like so well that I hope to see it develop into a much larger
planting.

I realize how inadequately this report covers the region it is sup¬
posed to represent since no mention is included of the various cen¬
ters of Iris interest in Virginia. I hope that members from some of
these points may supplement this with individual reports direct to
the Society, and that I may find better opportunity to go farther
afield another year.

MIDDLE ATLANTIC RECOMMENDS VARIETIES

® As to the usefulness to private growers generally, of national
and regional symposiums or synopses of votes for so-called best
varieties of tall-bearded Irises, we have encountered two differing
negative opinions.

1. Irises Best for What.

“Best for What?” objected one member whose question about
regional lists of recommended varieties voiced a thought we had
heard before, — as if a really popular vote may not reflect choices for
particular and differing uses of varieties by the voters, whether for
small gardens, for larger landscape effects, for table decoration,
for exhibition, etc.

A plan was devised whereby simultaneously each member could
vote both affirmatively for varieties by him preferred for his par¬
ticular uses, and also inferentially yet quite positively against
other and different varieties by him deemed inferior for the same
uses. This plan took form as follows : to send in one enclosure to
each regional member, both first, a printed ballot form upon which
to vote for up to 100 varieties of his selection for his uses; and also,

[57]

secondly , another and different printed form or clieck-list upon
which to check the name of each variety thus by the voter declared
to have been by him sufficiently observed growing in this region , to
enable him to give it any and all merited consideration as a candi¬
date for his vote on the other form first referred to above.

Any variety so checked by any one certain voter, on the second
form, but not in fact voted for by the same voter, on the first form,
would obviously be a variety deemed by this voter inferior to every
other variety in the same color group for which he did vote on the
first form after considering fully the relative merits of each such
variety.

In December, the decision was made to conduct such a popular
vote by members in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. Both
forms were printed and with a covering letter were mailed simul¬
taneously to all our members, each of whom was then invited to
attend a. regional conference in Philadelphia on January 20th to
consider the result of the voting.

The printed ballot ( first form) itself instructed the members to
vote their varietal preferences by the same color groups used by
the New England judges in their list at pages 33-35 of Bulletin No.
46, so that later horizontal comparisons could be made. It was
directed that votes be given only to such varieties as the member
had sufficiently observed actually growing in Region No. 3, and
which in his opinion the conference should recommend as the best,
or among the best, for the members in these states. Voters were
instructed to ignore extraneous factors such as origin, date of in¬
troduction, current prices, performance in other regions, etc., and to
vote only on the basis of inherent varietal quality including grow¬
ing and blooming habits in this region, — the finest older favorites
and the finest recent introductions, all alike, and each only on its
relative merits against all others in its class, to be given impartial
consideration insofar as such varieties had been in fact adequately
observed in this region by the voters. The ballot form itself sug¬
gested that our regional breeders might elect to refrain from voting
for their own originations, and at the same time pointed out that
no known rule of good taste required them so to refrain.

On the 4-page accompanying check-list, i. e., the second form
above referred to, were printed the names of 426 different varieties.
On this check-list, each voter was instructed to check the names as
before explained. The check-list included some old favorites which

[58]

at least formerly were the best to be had in their colors ; some other
varieties which in their turn won the favor of discerning judges ;
still other varieties that were rated high by various accredited
judges in the 1932-33 ratings ; and still other regional and other
seedlings which have not yet appeared in any rating list.

Each member was requested to fill out and to check his two forms
and to return them together to the sender.

2. As to Commercial Influence.

In Region No. 3, and quite possibly in some other regions, the
commercial breeders and growers are in number so few that their
personal votes can not be of substantial numerical importance in
any popular ballot. It is Iherefore obvious that by not consulting
them as to the method of conducting such a ballot, it was easy to ob¬
tain a result in which direct commercial influences was a truly
negligible factor.

3. Comment on the Returns.

In this our first popular regional ballot, 42 voters (21 men and
21 women), 25 per cent of the current total membership of the
three states, participated with the results shown in the following
analysis of the ballots and the check-lists. The voters by States
were : Pennsylvania, 21 — the majority of them from the trading
areas of Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh ; New Jersey,
20 — most of them from north of Trenton; Delaware, 1.

Not one variety among the 109 that won the most votes, obtained
a single vote by any commercial grower or breeder through his vot¬
ing for his own originations. Only four commercial growers voted.
Of them, three, I believe, have not distributed printed price lists
in recent years and do not have large stocks of other breeder’s
novelties ; the fourth did not vote for any of his own originations,
and his printed price-list includes, I believe, only varieties of his
own raising.

The value of the information on the second (check-list) forms
when considered in conjunction with the votes on the first (ballot)
forms, seems unquestionable as pointing to voters’ preferences for
and against particular varieties according to the uses intended for
them. For example : Of 17 voters who declared that they thoroughly
know Pocahontas and its performance in this region, only 4 voted
for it! — that is, only 23% of its intimates or familiars, so to speak,
voted for it. On the contrary : of 21 members who reported thor-

ough acquaintance with Los Angeles and its habits here, 19 voted
for it! — that is, full 90% of its intimates voted for it. And of all
voters who declared full knowledge of Wambliska, every one, —
full 100%, voted for it — as was also the case with Shasta, Rhein-
gauperle, Clara Noyes, Gay Hussar and Dorothy Deitz, which had
13, 11, 16, 8, 11 and 8 votes respectively.

When the letters accompanying the ballots were studied, it was
found that a considerable number of the members disapproved of
the color groups on the ballots, because they were unlike the gen¬
erally accepted color groups. For this reason, supported by the
unanimous vote of the conference on January 20th, with 4 of our 5
accredited judges present with other members, the result of the
voting is shown here by color groups agreeable to the scheme of
the color chart at the top of page 6 of the Alphabetical Check List.
Wherever disagreement between the color symbols in the latter
and the opinion of our regional judges at the conference, was found
to exist in relation to a particular variety, it has been grouped
in this tabulation according to the opinion of our judges.

It is confidently believed that a much greater percentage of our
membership would have voted, had it not been for the difficulty
they encountered in attempting to list their varietal preferences in
the color groups that appeared on the ballots. If your region
should plan to conduct a similar popular ballot, it is recommended
that on the check-lists to your members, varietal names be printed
by the same color groups that appear on your accompanying bal¬
lots. On our check-lists, unfortunately, the names were printed
only in alphabetical order, which tended to minimize participation
in the voting.

Something of the background of our voters can be seen in the
following table compiled from the data received upon the check¬
lists and ballots : —

No. of Who are thoroughly acquainted with the performance
Voters in this region of varieties to the number of

4 . more than 175

7 . 100 to 175

15 . 50 to 99

30 . 35 to 49

6 . less than 35

Total 42 Average 79

[60]

While 75% of our members did not vote, we are without reason
to believe that their votes would have changed the result in any
substantial way except quantitatively. Certain it seems that the old
favorites for which many of the 25% voted, similarly would have
received the votes of many of the other 75% had they voted; and
more members who are familiar with numerous novelties are be¬
lieved to be found among the 25% than among the 75%.

Of the 428 varietal names printed on our check-lists, a total of
113 were not checked by even one of the voters. That is to say, it
seems that each of these 113 varieties is either without distribution
in this region, or it has not been seen growing in this region by any
of the voters, or has not been here observed sufficiently to enable
even one voter to declare that he thoroughly knows its performance
here. This applies, for example, to such as Aubade, Capt. Courag¬
eous, Colossus, Crown Prince, Easter Morn, Ethel Peckham, Fe-
delma, Hollywood, Imperial Blush, Irma Pollock, Lady Para¬
mount, Legend, Marquita, Modoc, Motif, Mrs. Herbert Hoover,
Natividad, Nurmahal, Rose Petal, Shirvan, Sierra Blue, Theodo-
linda, Thuratus, Winneshiek, etc.

Similarly, each of the following varieties was checked by only
one voter : — Akbar, Al-lu-wee, Alta California, Ashtoreth, Aurex,
Crysoro, Dogrose, Dune Sprite, Eloise Lapham, Ethelwyn Dubuar,
Hermene, Jeb Stuart, Mary Senni, Minister Fernand David, Na-
ronda, Noweta, Paulette, Phebus Cayeux, Rhadi, Ronda, Rosemont,
Sirius Bunyard, Spring Maid, Starsong, and Tid-bit.

Only two voters reported that they have thoroughly observed
the regional growing and blooming habits of Blackamoor, Douglas,
El Tovar, Eppo, Fairylea, Fulgore Cayeux, Joycette, Gilead, Ker-
manshah, Mine. Serouge, Petrucchio, Pink Jadu, Ragusa, Rusty
Gold, Santa Fe, Ultra and Violet Crown.

Only three voters checked Alameda, Ambera, Blue Banner, Boa-
dicea, Cantabile, Challenger Sass, Debussy, Esterel, Evolution,
Floridor, Heloise, Hernani, Hypnos, Mareschal Ney, Mme. Abel
Chatenay, Morning Glory, Penn Treaty, Quivera, Rasakura, Rose
Dominion, Rose Valley, Waconda.

In view of the method taken to obtain a result not dictated by
commercial influence, perhaps it may be permitted here to commend
particularly to dealers selling these varieties so little known here,
that if their sales to Region No. 3 are fewer in proportion to their
sales in other regions, then we think they may profitably put some
effective advertising and selling effort against this market. For votes

[61]

were in fact cast both for definitely superseded, and even for blacklisted varieties. We mention this only
to emphasize our belief that when members more generally have personal experience in blooming the mod¬
erns which are definitely better than obsolete ones, their enjoyment of their collections and their appre-

• r-H

a >

f-i

6jo

H-O

• r-H

• rH

c+H

«HH

• rH

<N
CO CO

H o

-4-3

•3s:

-4 M ?
* 4 O

H ® a

X -Hi

2 o

j© 3
H ffl

tJD

3 gM
fl .5

S r* H

CD rH
GO 00

H lO CO 1.0 rH CD 05 CD CD
NNCOOOWCDhOOh

rH CD 03
GO CD 00

i— I GO t-
GO t4 00

CO 03
OO 00

LO 00 H CO : 03 O rH

os t" oo oo : oo oo oo

CO rH
00 GO

03 03

^ Ph

£ f

"D O

-S fl g
PhW 2

c?Eh

—I 03
03 0)

-M ■+■>

O o
Eh>

oS cS

Ph Ph

d? Ph

05 05

bC d

•n .D
05 rb

^ J

*r-^ O

c3 c3 Wl
Eh hb ^

-D

,—N tr

o O']

CO ~

^ 4
CO -4
CO

cS <=<

ce i

-b b

-b

r Q

03 -rH

* S

bjc

^ £

tr, rH
P rH

H O
O

• rH 03

^ CS

o W

o ^

-4 V

£ g £

03 . ^

s ©

D o

as rt

w ©

.5f> ^

05 «

b ^
'b &
-b 03

O C5 CO O rH *

O rH >0 *

^ ^ ^ ^ ^

-+l rH 03 O IC>

CD CD GO O t—

^ ^ ^

O CO rH
O t>- CD

00 CO t— CO ZO *
03 03 rH i — I , — |

rH tO rH * H<

GCrHrH0Oo3'-Hi — ( i — I, — | 03

rH 03 CO rH to CD t— 00 03 O H 03

[62]

: t-

: 00

r— I O Ci GO Cl

00 t- 00 00 00 _J

rtf tp- : oo to ^

00 t— : GO GO Q

lo OJ :

GO t— : GO

n o a

00 CO N

tp-

r— 1

t>-

tH O
00 GO

to co tH O : t- t-

Ci ci o Ci : oo go

©~

-pn>

c<5

t-3

H-H

p £

H-H ?p

m p

' p

£ £

P 03

6 ^

P ”
£ P

EH H

-pn

o
xn

_ ©

W) 3

HP
rP

bJO

• rH
*0
fi
©

xn p 0
o d ^
P GO EH

• rH

-p

Ph ~

r*p ,

HP O
xn
©

■M

H-H

H=5

• rH

-pn

■p-n

to Cl ci LO t~-

vO v° V® V®

^S"' to''

O Cl Ci

» rH

"©

4-H

to Cl r-H O

^ a oi o

<4H

«4H

1 — 1

£_J

Sz;

-pH

►>

• rH

■pH

-pH

r-i

• rH

H-H

zfl

H4*

« rH

c“<

l-H

*> rH

©~

• rH

•4— 1

H-H

H-h

• rH

fsi

T—i

1 — 1

«H

CO tM

|© O

CO to CO t-

-t-H

GO Ci O rH
H H Cvl CQ

<*>

-K>

-PH

• rH

-PH

CO GO 00 o

p ^

W © p *

CO Ci

p # £n ^ ^ £n£n

JOffiCOlOcO®*Cl O Ci
pq OO t - t— lO 00 tO pH LO t^to

C/2

PrHOCCcO^Oi-JCi* O Cl
^T)t^COfOClCOCOC] Cl Cl

HcOClQOrHOt-lotOtO^CO

pCOcoNdlMHHHHHH

Cl CO "H LO CO t— GO Ci O t— I Cl
CIOICICICICICICICOCOCO

[63]

<N
Xfl CO

Eh o

I-

o Z
Eh ®

tOD

A o

w ^

P".

’E

r< u

+->

o °

0 L>
(ZT

$ ^P

A 0
Qj'S U
O O O

&k*Ph

^ ® a
° o W

.— CZ2
cZ <D

-4—' •4—'

o o

H £>

fcl

lOCOMO^O^IOIGOWtOa
00 GO CO 00 00 GO L— t— 00 GO L— t>- (>-

O tH ©3 t-
05 00 GO GO

N H : OJ CO N O

GO GO GO : 00 l> 00 00

aT ©1

03 ~

P S

^ Pa

2 W

o3 ^

p a

• rH

-*n> £

s ^

5-i

5-1

? I 2 2

~ r

~ - 3 >H

P O „

r, ^ ©

I .2

be a

JUl c* IP , ,

5 S M
O m m pq

2 ©
a1

O -4—*

a 03

03 GO

£ «
5h ©

P 0
d ^

03 5h
5h O

p-i m r-i w .,

a cc q a ^

CO 05
Cl r-H

GO OO
03 03

•r- 1 *rH

s s

• rH

-m

•r-j

-'^GCOCO'^OOt^* O i— I * Cl 05

O O IO CO CO CO io
1> CO lO Tf l> LO CO

O Cl

o t>-

Tfrl rjl

N O Ol CO lO 05 CO *

tH Cl (Cl Cl ! — | i—i Cl

1C © *

CO Cl Cl Ol H H

O bl

^ S

. m

N C3

P P

> QQ

^ Qj

^ K*

O t-

Cl i— i

•s ^

g P

pp «

Cw U-(

03 S

P P

> 03

^ k>

I •«

CP ?H
I 0

I kH

03 «W

o °
k £
® o

cc3

' d
Ad ©

S m H,

^ 63 ©

r©

ft P

2 w

03 Ad

« O oj
O o3

05 05 GO GO 00 00

r©

MrtllOCOSaiOOHlMCO^lO

mcocococococo^^’t^rjiT#

t— IOOCOi— ICOt— (OlO
OJSMOOOOt>OOt>

H'fCOCLOCOSOO
O )» 00 00 00 00 00 00

(Cl

M 2=>

^ o

GO Cl

5-i ^

ft -©
CC 02

be w

o £

S P

? J3 o <«

O Cl

co AA

-. rb °

w ^

£ ® P

03 5h S ^

&j ©

rT ft „
v— ft 33

C/2 P

be ^

p? 2

bJO

a> ft

o p

O) N Cl 05 05 ^ O rt

J/5 r-( I— 1 i— I i—(

P GO QO t>- O 05 lO O ^

^COl>Ol>OlOOlO

m
P
P
P

^ Cjr,

bD vp
c3

K*-

co ^

P a
©

^ GO Cl O O 05 >— I

CO CO n CO Cl CC rl

^ffllOHlHOSOCO
HH Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl H H H

Ot^OOOGOr-
rfl ^ hJH Tfl lO If

Cl CO
LO LO

[64]

50 00

Ci co

oo oo

CiH03cOOOt->Oait~C50

000000100000t>CCNNI>X

*-T Hg

-4— ' C3

cj 3

fH o

OP r^j

& pp

be •:

t" H O : co : : ^ LO oo £ q.

CO t> 05 :oo : :ooooooX^

bC ~ ^
E rt 2

:co : : : : : :

: t-- :::::::: _ o cu

H— I I_i i*H

O')

• rH

b* ^

fH 03

Q5 ~-

v , *\

■S PP

05 N— ^

•r-5

t“5 C5
w 03

b£

£ e

m ^

»\ Co

PS 02

(~1

05 C£]
COD ^
O 05

w Ph

H O O

M 02

o £

w O

be rt

§ ^

a a

O 3
hH >"0

03 03 50 o lO 03 lO CO
03

H Ci t> M

52 <<
Ci I
S3

• rH

-tn>

L-O

Jo o

^D .H

o .3
ta 3

^ PP

05 T3
05 05

o Ch

. w

„ o

_ _ , m

—5 t»

• rH 05

H> ^
05
05

M Ph

S d „

■ 2 A sT

^ H &
g oP O

s § s

05 05

• 71

=r£ ^

05
>

r5=l

fH O-

< 3-
I o "£
^ Ph .22

05 *2

•+H5 *s r-'

o i>j cr

^ i s

<o s s

<4-1

O r-T

CO CO t>- t>- O lO 50 CO 50 O H 03 00
OOOOWOOOONht>CO«NOOOO

r-l O
05 05

r— l00 00 l0HO0503t~rH
05 00 00 t>- 00 O 00 00 CO o

03 50 H 50
05 05 CO OO

<35

P f 4

Tfl

1 pp

Ifc

> — i ci

i~H . —

^ £ O t®

pp ^ fi

^ CO

^ A

Tj -Th

3 5>

r-i

• rH

- ■ § S £

hP C? h O P>

-+n

-M

<15

• rH
?H

"cO

03 H 50 H lO 05 50 50 50 rH % CO CC

tsNQOl>C5IONLOOt>cOOO
00 00 50c0^C0ON0)^L0c0

lO LO 05 03 ^2 fO IQ 03 O t>- LO i — !

iHr-li— ICOHi— I i— 1 r— I > — I ’ — I r— I 03

C b

• rH

<^5

O 35

^ a

O
h O

H t>- H 50 O t>- t— l>- —ft

In 00 CO 00 50 lO LO io t> Ol

f-p

03 03
50 50

rHOi— IC0c0rHCCt^5Ot^* H rH
H CO CO 03 CO H CO CO 03 i — I 03 03

CO CO CO 03 r-l i— I

Hl050t^C0050r- IO3C0HIO
lo O o lo IO LO 50 50 50 50 50 50

hh O

O Ci Ci 00 00 CO

o a

=C O

O
Ph

>rH

"35

• rH

[63]

Ci 30 LO H CO 03 03 I— I O 50 co CO

03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 1— I 1— ( r-l 1— I

Ot^COCC-Oi-
50 50 50 50 N t'

03 CO H IO 50 N GO
t- 1- L— t- t- L-

Xfl

5z;

#a»

o ■“

H ^ f>>0
^ bJD

5-1

^ e

0 2 5 5^

!> ^

(-H

bfl

® bJDHH

C «

05 T ~

C5 o O
5h © [V

P>>

£ 2
p o be

W H rt

gw g

^ ©

— w

C6 03

eo lO
GO 00

t>.

N 00 *t W 00 ’t1 lO N IO 05 Cl 05 IO IO CO C5

oonconsooconnsoonncooon

t— io b- i— i

GO 00 00 C5

I - to CO

00 00 00

1—1 o

05 CO

CO Cl Cl
00 OO 00

Ph'

O -

IT CO

CO 05
01 Cl m
^ ^ m

m K 5 °

O ^ ^ -C 1

Cl © ^

- p m

rr* -M

« <5

»
• rH

Ph <

4-P

fee

H
• rH

Ph p
>

l_4 ^

£ t:

K -P P r*

^ [jn ©

r o

03 ©5

C5 iH

GQ ~

>-5 fl

~ Cl ~

fee

• rH

o O C5

p ^ p

u d » ti C! ^

^ O H O ^ O

3 £

ftp ©

M ©

fee P

5 5 O

-©

Ph'

03
©
pH

P3 o .

o o

• rH

t©

££ ^ SR ^ ^ ^

O' Cl CO Cl ci ^
1> LO IO co CO CO

v© v©

lO o

b- CO

to *

b~ CO C5 CO CO 05
i— I Cl 1 1 1— I T— I Cl

Cl 'O * Cl » N ci

tH rH Cl rH ,_|

05 O H Cl CO HI IO CO
t-ooooooaooooooo

b- OO 05 O
00 OO oo 05

i— i Cl co hh
05 05 05 C5

fee

io C3

H-!

c _o

p-»

C/3

1— I CO t>- t'* !-*

Hi o HH CO Q

CO Cl Cl Cl O O O CO' O' 05 05 05 05 °0 00 QC o

•*->

Co P

2 £

*G0 O

- — 1 +->

« §
« s

2 2
h HH

f^K

C/3

h rd
p O

fee

QD £

H • rH
" £

* I

o O

-4—' ©

H-^

t©

C/3

*+o

2©

• rH

ci
©
A
Ph

olT

•

03
©

. b-
: OO

05 05 00

oo : go

: : co
: : oo

ci — s
^ GO

-P -1 00

o 22

r— I N. _ X i-H

t W.

H-P r-' ,—t

(-H r— «

A Q 5

P! .2 3
0^2
O Ph m

O Cl *

v9 vS>

t ^ i-H

CO 05

i— I CO *
CO Cl

Cl Cl 1— I

to co b-

W « a; 'wH

[66]

CO tJH CO O CO
oo t> t> o »

10 go oo to
00 00 00 t>

^ CO
t~ CM

cm ~

od ^

pH ^
4-)

£ £
§ ®
s ®

O >H

H ^ ft
£1 Q O

« M

ft so ^

.s?

| £ •=
i-l

ft ft m

CNN*

v© . c v©

lO CO to
SO ^ CO

* b- cm so *
h cq o]

t— I rH O 05 35

OO Ol O H tq
05 C5 O O o

H-J

• pH

3d a3
od O

O g

« pH

2 35 _

- W 'S

-M

-K>

(ft

f©

«H

H a M O N
t> N N OO 00

to o o
oo oo oo

ftH

fft

?h m

3 ^
£ ■£
■rH O

ft1 >
Ph

3 £

5> rH

I *

go ft

• rH rH

PQ £

^ ft

<5 3

33 2

rt £

2 S

-£ CS

O Ph h

^ 00
05 CM
CM "

•N co

P as

m m

> Ph

O Ph
w o3
. GO

be go

~ M

o3
ft

CO rH ft 1

C as ft

o £

N CO N O 00

O CM H 00 o O
l_q 05 OO H O lO

o M

ftD

• rH

r-H

p .

• rH

H-2

H— '
CO
CD

(ft)

r-H

l>H

3 gj
05 Z
GO 03

go or
w cs °
ft ft ,,

(M O CO H CO

CQ rH rH rH

• rH

H lO O N
O O O O

oo ^
o

o ft

ft 15

^ c3
CO H

to co
00 oo

»s <r*«s

m 00

GO O0

c3 i— I

r^j

’OD

»s •

a> 02

Sh CD
CD -M

• rH O

> >

UH ^

ft ft

s 'i

r^ O

^ M

so *

1h> <iH
O
Ph

^ .2

CD
O
CD

i ^

ft CO

ft io

SO *

o oo

OO 05

o o

• rH

15
OD

OD 3 §

ft sS S

^ N Ph

£ I CO

° 4

eft d

ft ft ^3

fH Ph 05

o o

ft ^ £
2 £

pi _? 1h
P g h

=0 'tP

1i ID

ft _
O ft

^ s

b. pp

CD H

1 °
ft Ph

[67]

The Philadelphia Conference

For future tabulations of national and regional ratings or Votes,
similar to those reported on pages 51 to 53 of Bulletin No. 47, and
on pages 33 to 35 of Bulletin No. 46, the Philadelphia Con¬
ference consisting of both accredited judges and other regional
members, unanimously approved these recommendations : —

1. That the White Seifs, the Plicatas, the White Bicolors (Amoe-
nas) be not merged under one color group but be listed under
their distinctive designations, separately ;

2. That the Yellows (other than Blends) be not all merged under
one color classification, but that Yellow Selfs and Yellow Bi¬
colors (Variegatas) be listed under their respective designa¬
tions, separately ;

3. That the so-called Near- Whites be not separately so tabulated,
but be merged under other color groups, according to their
several officially-designated color symbols ; and

4. That the other Color-Groups be according to those shown on
pages 51 to 53 of Bulletin No. 47, which admit of easier
and more accurate allocations consistent with the scheme of
the color chart on page 6 of the Alphabetical Check-List.

Concerning varieties for which a marked liking was expressed
by voters in Region No. 3, in part because of individual unfamiliar¬
ity by some of those voters, with other varieties that received fewer
votes, the conference unanimously voted, as to this region , as fol¬
lows : —

1. That Shasta is preferable to Taj Mahal.

2. That True Delight is generally superior to the variable and
often slow-growing yet lovely Anna Farr.

3. That Corrida is generally a better doer than Crusader.

4. That Wedgwood should be preferred over Duke of Bedford.

5. That Lent A. Williamson, for its tendency to fade out, should
be subordinated to Alcazar.

6. That King Tut be commended over Isoline on account of her
slow growth and shyness. One member reported unusual suc¬
cess with Isoline grown in a bed of ashes.

[68]

7. That Coronation (Yellow Self) is far superior to Citronella
(Yellow Bicolor).

8. That Yellow Moon, notwithstanding’ susceptibility to root rot,
is superior to the taller Shekinah which is similarly susceptible
and also has more variable growing habits and thin substance.

Various judges and other members reported dissatisfaction with,
a lessening liking for, other varieties for reasons as follows : — -

Mother of Pearl, Candlelight, Sir Michael, Cameliard and
Jacqueline Guillot : — stems reported as variable between erect¬
ness and snakiness.

Asia : — stem instability often requires staking.

San Francisco : — extreme susceptibility to root rot reported
even in cases of alleged fine drainage and in the absence of
excess of lime or other fertilizer.

Moonlight : — extremely cup-shaped standards ; susceptible
to rot.

Brandywine : — variable growth reported from sections other
than Southern New Jersey.

Grace Sturtevant and Allure : — slow growing habits.

Mary Barnett : — reported color fading.

Aphrodite and Ochracea : — colors displeasing to various
members.

Trostringer and Magnifica : — form or carriage of falls dis¬
pleases various members.

Steepway considered inferior to Ilypnos.

Tenebrae : — color effect indifferent or ordinary.

SPECIES NOTES

Iris kumaonensis Wallich

® For the person who has access to books the pleasures of garden¬
ing can be variously increased sometimes with less labor and pain
than in actual operation, and for the person who is concerned with
species, books often are the only sources of information or hopes of
sight of many of the kinds that have not gotten beyond the stage
of being botanist’s specimens.

This year there flowered for the first time one clump among iris
raised from seed collected in India. Turning to Dykes “The Genus
Iris” it was immediately apparent that one plant was Iris kumao¬
nensis of the Pseudoregel ia Section. Unfortunately none of the
few flowers set seed so there is no opportunity to compare the seed
pod with his description. In other ways the plant agreed excel¬
lently, with its short foliage at flowering time, almost stemless
bloom, solitary flower, its long perianth tube and clear mauve pur¬
ple flowers with irregular blotches on the falls.

Our plants have grown slowly but apparently happily in a
sunny field with light sandy soil but have not spread rapidly.

Turning to books for such an identification also brings one to
cross references and to notes and pictures of other allied species.
Perhaps no opportunity will ever present itself for seed of any
of the species related to 7. kumaonensis so pictures from books
are included here with grateful acknowledgment to each pub¬
lisher.

From Curtis Botanical Magazine (Vol. XLIII) Tab. 6957 is
copied the plate of Iris Kingiana Baker which Dykes made a syno¬
nym of 7. kumaonensis . The description by Dr. J. G. Baker read
in part : “It comes about midway between 7. pumila and 7. tectorum
and forms a connecting link between the sub-genera Pogoniris and
Evansia , in the former of which the claw of the outer segment is
furnished with a beard, and in the latter with a more or less lacini-
ated crest. Our drawing was made from a plant that flowered
in the Kew collection at the end of May this present year.” (1887.)

Dykes pointed out his differences of opinion about the rudimen¬
tary crest and beard and gives other reasons for creating a sub¬
genus, Pseudoregelia to take the place of Baker’s Pseudevansia.

C. C. Thomas

IRIS KUMAONENSIS
(Natural Size)

[71]

IBIS KINGIANA FROM CURTIS BOTANICAL MAGAZINE

[72]

IRIS SIKKIMENSIS

From W. R. Dykes’ Genus Iris. (Reprinted by permission of the

University of Chicago Press.)

[74]

From Curtis Botanical Magazine also, Volume XLIX (1893)
Tab. 7276 comes the figure of Iris Hookeriana which differs con¬
spicuously from I. kumaonensis in having a taller stem and two
flowers to the stem.

So far I have found no illustration of Iris goniocarpa Baker that
can be copied and no description that gives a very vivid idea of
the flower.

And for Iris sikkimensis Dykes, the only illustration is that ap¬
pearing in Dykes’ “The Genus Iris” of which only a portion is
reproduced here with acknowledgment to Cambridge University
Press and The University of Chicago Press. To one unfamiliar
with the Iris, this seems an unusual plant with its widely opened
and horizontally flaring standards.

One wishes that some way might be found in which seed of all
these unseen species might be had, even if years are needed for their
germination.

Iris dichotoma Pallas

Many years have elapsed since the first flowering of the Vesper
Iris in my garden but only this season have I managed to get flowers
to the photographer for its portrait. The first seeds came to me
from Peiping, sent by a Chinese doctor who accompanied me on a
visit to the Western tombs and who seemed somewhat amused by
my eagerness over this slender plant that bloomed in the grassy
meadows thereabouts. The plants from that seed gave only the
familiar creamy white flowers variously dotted and blotched with
dull lavender, except in one case which was pure white with yel¬
low hafts and no darker reticulations.

Since then other seed has produced the lavender form illustrated
but no particular mention has been made of the fact that this
lavender varies somewhat in hue and the falls vary somewhat in
the amount of their markings. Sometime perhaps we shall have
selected strains of this iris to add interest to the summer borders.

Notes have already been given in the Bulletin as to its useful¬
ness in various parts of the country and possibly all members know
that it occupies a separate division among all irises. The roots
are thick and fleshy, springing from an irregular somewhat knotty
crown that sends up each year a strong stalk, with wide leaves
arranged somewhat like those of the blackberry lily ( Belem -
canda chinensis) and ending in a widely branching stalk. Each

tip carries a sheath from which many flowers are produced. The
flowers, natural size in our picture, are not large and open only in
the afternoon, here usually about two-thirty, and close after sun¬
down. Whether or not it is common elsewhere, it has been noticed
that here they are visited by wasps as well as bees and flies. Thanks
to these many insect visitors, the flowering is usually followed by
a good crop of seed. This, if planted early will produce small plants
flowering late the first autumn, but the best effects come the second
and following years.

Iris dichotoma

Plants were set as young seedlings, in a semi-stiff micaceous
loam, in Fairfax County, Va., in back of low growing founda¬
tion planting of shrubs, having a southeastern exposure. Well
drained. They lived and increased in size of plant and beauty of
flower each season for three perhaps four years, and then sud¬
denly passed away. Their passing however occurred in the terri¬
ble drouth year of 1930 when water in the suburbs was at a
premium and could not be used for the garden.

The cooling effect of the surrounding shrubs seemed to be an aid
in their well being until that drouth year. As they developed
in leafage, so they increased in beauty of flower, the plants a
veritable fountain of bloom. The mature heads of bloom showed
so many buds, that though each flower lasts less than a day,
each day for nearly a week, the fountain endured and was showy
enough to attract attention of visitors.

Chas. E. F. Gersdorff.

Forms of dichotoma

Iris dichotoma, native of Eastern Asia, is a decidedly interest¬
ing iris species. It blooms at a time when most iris are long
through, season generally August and early September. The
flowers are born on stems in surprising numbers. Individual
bloom lasts but a day. Its habit of flowering in the afternoon
explains the application of the name Vesper Iris, which it truly is.

Because of its novel features, I decided to experiment with
seedlings and watch for variants in colorings. This year, out of
several hundred seedlings of a cross of a form from Manchuria
with a form from China, I obtained three rather marked varia¬
tions from the common coloring. The type I have in abundance

[76J

Lilian A. Guernsey

IRIS DICHOTOMATA
[ 77 ]

is a lavender self. In these new seedlings I found a very pale
form, practically a self white. Another marked form was a very
intensely colored type. Two specimens of this coloring occurred.
And thirdly, a form with a snow-white signal patch (that area
where the beard is on the bearded iris) with ordinary coloring.
Many seedlings had a slight marking of white but this form was
very noticeable because of its extra large size rendering it notable
at once.

I have selfecl these three forms and have seed pods on them
practically ripe. It will be highly interesting to see just what
they yield. Perhaps color and size improvements will bring this
iris into more gardens. The study of wildlings and exotics is an
engaging pastime. Perhaps others have had some experiences
with this iris that would be interesting to readers.

Robert Schreiner, Minnesota.

Iris bucharica Foster

Of all the tall growing iris of the Juno Section, possibly the
easiest to manage is the species with a name that harks back to
Bokhara and all that that suggests. Early in the spring it pushes
up its sheaf of corn-like leaves that grow up along a stem which
reaches fully eighteen inches in well-established plants. In all the
upper axils are fat buds that open into charming flowers with
glistening white style branches and falls covered with clear lemon
yellow. The topmost flower opens first but the others develop be¬
fore that has faded.

Most persons seeing it for the first time doubt if it can be an
iris, so different is the general aspect of the plant from the
familiar bearded iris.

Here it has flourished in the garden soil to which has been added
liberal supplies of leaf soil and sharp sand to lighten the strong
clay. Increase is only moderate so that division is not often needed.
When it is necessary the plant should be lifted carefully as the
tops are dying down, and the offsets should be removed with care
not to injure the large fleshy roots that characterize the members
of this section. These are fairly permanent and produce from their
sides and tips the annual feeding roots that nourish each year’s
growth. The bulbs should be reset at once to prevent unnecessary
drying out.

[78 J

Geo. C. Stephenson

IRIS BUC'HARICA

Iris ruthenica Ker-Gawler.

For the present issue there is only time to record that one
photograph comes through the kindness of Mr. Carl Starker, and

[ 79 ]

Geo. C. Stephenson

IRIS RUTIIENICA

to say that it is a delight to know that somewhere in the United
States there are plants that bloom. My own gave only leaves
until they died after a move that suited them not at all.

L 80 ]

THE FAMILY TREE

■ Referring to difficult crosses again, I succeeded in making sev¬
eral others to the extent of obtaining seed, only in several instances
losing the seedlings through an untimely late freeze, those of Sole-
dad X Kochi, and in case of Kochi by Blue Boy, having nice, but
few plump seeds fail to germinate.

Georgia X Caroline E. Stringer gave but one seedling of value,
Spring Beauty, which in a New England garden in 1932 showed
considerable improvement in substance and lasting quality over
another fine pink on the market.

Out of Cecil Min turn X Caroline E. Stringer, a numerous proge¬
ny of pinks, grays, palest blues and whites were obtained which
are purely of garden merit, of the type often referred to as table iris.

Alcazar X Dusk has given two seedlings of merit, one outstand¬
ing and the other though subsequently used in further breeding has
since been discarded.

Ramona has proved a potent parent either way, but have no re¬
sults as yet to report. Chasseur X Mildred Presby has given one
promising seedling so far. Sarabande X Seminole grew into a
number of strong seedlings.

Reciprocal crosses between the following have produced seed that
germinate :

Mrs. Cuthbertson and Chasseur

Dusk and Mme. Cheri Chasseur and Caroline E.

Chasseur and Anne Bullen Stringer.

Mildred Presby X Souv. de
Mme. Gaudichau

I obtained but few seed from the above excepting in case of Anne
Bullen X Chasseur, Mme. Cheri X Dusk, and Dusk X Mme. Cheri.

Suzanne Autissier X Souv. de Mme. Gaudichau gave many seed¬
lings which have yet to bloom.

Geo. J. Tribolet X Santa Barbara and Geo. J. Tribolet, X Dusk,
each gave amongst others, one strong growing seedling.

Sachem has yet to set seed for me, but its pollen has been effective
on Dusk, Sophie, Deucalion, Ramona, Rose Madder, Golden Heart
and Mrs. H. F. Bowles. Dulcimer X Mme. Cheri gave a number
of strong growing seedlings.

Under the above heading, notes by me in the January, 1934, num¬
ber, leads to others, and though but recently published they were
written something like a year previously. Subsequent studies, par-

[81]

ticularly of certain of my seedlings mentioned by name, have led
to a withdrawal from actual existence of several of them. The rea¬
sons therefor were extremely good, but so involved that it does not
seem desirable to more than mention by name those which since
have become extinct. These were Matuli, Natasha, Shaga-laska,
Silver Sheen and Gretel, and mentioned in earlier Bulletins —
Linda, Leocrates, Laodicea and Chenango ; with several others be¬
ing held purely for possible further breeding exploits.

Though I have a penchant for naming quite a few things each
year because they please me, I yet may be pardoned this, considered
by some an offense, for having actually introduced but a few of
them. The named ones have all at some time shown some quality
I hoped to perpetuate in better seedlings, and though some have
failed me utterly to transmit the quality in mind, I have steadily
gained some measure of success with others, and all told consider¬
able pleasure in having before me varieties most pleasing, if not
world-beaters.

Regarding my report in the second paragraph of the same paper,
I must regretfully add that of all of the “wide” crosses made only
the following survive as actual growing seedlings — one Soledad X
Magnifica, a few Shekinah X Fritjof and several Kurdistan X Geo.
J. Tribolet. The others developed plant weaknesses from which
they gradually passed away.

From certain crosses I have obtained large pods fat with plump
seeds — yet none of these have ever germinated, even after a period
of several years — Ch’enyaun X Tenebrae ; White Queen X Im-
pressario ; Caroline E. Stringer X Dusk.

One from Shekinah X 27 Avril gave such an insignificant flower
and stalk that I almost discarded the others sight unseen.

Two from Chasseur X Mildred Presby gave nice blends, one on
the blue side, the other on the red, each with flowers larger than
either parent. Wm. Marshall X Margery so far are nothing to
rave about. Sarabande X Seminole gave a number of interesting
things very pleasing to me, most of them larger than either
parent, with better branching, all partaking of the type of coloring
of the former, that is showing a lighter edge to the falls, most with
flaring falls, a few drooping to straight hanging and these latter
mostly small dainty flowered things on thin wiry stems in keeping
with the size of the blossoms, and a few with a picotee-tulip-like
edging to the standards, flushed not penciled as in plicatas.

C. E. F. Gersdorff.

[82]

BEARDED IRISES AT WISLEY, 1933

Adapted from the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society,

Yol. LIX, Part 1, January, 1934

■ English methods of judging irises, their cultivation and judging
over a period of years, seems ideal and it is most unfortunate that
we, in America, have not succeeded in following out a similar prin¬
ciple. In 1923 wre attempted a Trial Garden for seedlings and new
introductions at the Bronx with the idea that, eventually, there
would be similar plantings in at least four other climatic zones. We
tried vainly in the following years to have plants sent for trial and
to have judges act at least three times during each flowering season.
Until 1929 the only awards of merit were made to irises thus judged,
selections from a pitiful handful of new introductions. At Wisley
varieties for trial are selected at the big shows (or sent in by origi¬
nators from abroad). They are then grown on and judged more
than once, annually, as to their future in one of four classes ;
Awards of Merit, Standard Collection, General Collection, Dis¬
cards, a 1933 addition. Each year the variety is again placed in its
proper category and the average gardener can easily select from
what the experts consider of value.

Previous reports have been made in Vols. 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 so
that you must not expect the following abstracts to be at all com¬
plete. It is interesting to note that, under English conditions,
American varieties differ widely from our valuation.

The varieties are only roughly grouped as to color as again we
get a difference between the American and the English classification.

“Whites”

Standard Collection : Yves Lassailly, A. M.

General Collection: Athene, Milky Way, White Queen, White Star.
Discarded : Antares.

“Plicatas”

Standard Collection: Jane Austin (Insole).

General Collection : Parisiana.

Discarded : Byron.

“ Amoenas”

General Collection: B. Y. Morrison.

Discarded : Corot.

“Lavender to Purple Bicolor”

Standard Collection : Cydnus, Autocrat, Palemon, Fandango, Rose
Marie.

[83 j

General Collection : Anne Page, Bglamour, Mercutio, Neptune, Sa¬
lome, Apollo, Cypriana Superba, Maharana, Vashti, Do¬
minion, Hochelaga, Houri, Ibpall, Esplendido.

Discarded : Blue Lagoon, Papillon, Samothrace, Simone Yaissiere,
Vanlo, Moa, Oriental, Slialbruz, Sirdar, Tarchon, Brilliant,
Fragonard, Harriet Presby, Luciane, Princess, M. Haute-
feuille, Peerless.

‘‘Purple Selfs”

Standard Collection : No change.

General Collection: Aquarelle, Avalon, Bellorio, Grey Lady, M.
Masse, Mother of Pearl, Odoratissima ; Arsace, Blue Boy,
Yenetia, Dr. Chas. H. Mayo, Dog Bose, Elinor Blossom, San
Luis Key.

Discarded: Gargantua, Isabey, Jacqueline Guillot, Pallida Octa¬
vius, Pallida Sheldrake, Pluto, Pte. W. A. Logan, M. M.,
Purple Haze, Salawat, Swatara, Sybilla, Powhatan, Mary-
lise, Perry’s Favorite, Rugajo.

“Blends”

Standard Collection: Horace Yernet, Allure, Mrs. Yalerie West,
F. C. C. 1933 ; Rhodes, A. M. 1933 ; Gloaming, A. M. 1933 ;
Don Juan, Petrea; Zwannenburg, A. M. 1933; Mary Geddes,
A. M. 1933 ; King Midas.

General Collection : Farandole, Gericault, Marquisette, Olive Mur¬
rell, Senorita, Distinction, Albiero, Allies, Caylus, Fire God,
Le Correge, Nene, Opera, Rose Madder, Steepway, Greuze,
Mme. Chobaut, Ophelia, Sandrine.

Discarded : Dr. Bless, Francheville, Geraldine, Sarabande, Cambus-
can, Amanullah, Gernez, M. Boyer, Samos, Gustave Courbet,
Le Grand Ferre, Louis David, Wraith.

“ Variegata”

Standard Collection : Watteau, Detaille.

General Collection: Gagus, A. M. 1916; Iroquois, Salonique, Paul
Baudry, Rosa Bonheur, Thrudwang, Triste.

Discarded: J. F. Millet, Solana.

“Yellow Selfs”

Standard Collection : Nicolas Poussin, A. M. 1933 ; Sunbeam, Ravo
de Sol, Moonbeam, A. M. 1933.

General Collection : Bastien Le Page, Canadian Gold, Delacroix,
Mrs. Neubronner, Pliecda, Sherwin Wright, Virginia Moore,
Aliquippa, Chasseur, Daffodil, Primrose, Soledad.

Discarded: Aurea, Etta, A. M. 1916; Leutha, Queen Flavia.

[ 84 ]

ASK ME ANOTHER

■ Superphosphate. A question from Mr. Julius Dornblut of Bel¬
lingham, Washington, seems well answered by some experiments
made at the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College by
Miss Charlotte Strayer. They merely emphasize the fact that soil
conditions are most variable. In the experiment quoted it should
be remembered that both Yigoro and Cotton Seed Meal are much
more nitrogenous than superphosphate and hence their effect more
evident. We are not told what the next year’s bloom may or may
not have revealed in the three beds.

“The soil here is extremely alkaline and the city water has much
free lime in it.

“ Three beds were prepared — No. 1, Superphosphate; No. 2, Yig¬
oro ; No. 3, Cotton Seed Meal. And the result in No. 3, where cot¬
ton seed meal was used, was remarkable ; the foliage, fine color,
strong, sturdy, and nearly two feet high ; the flower stalks absolutely
straight and eight inches taller than the same varieties grown in
either of the other beds ; the blooms of wonderful size and substance,
huge but not in the least coarse in texture — truly magnificent.

“The next best results were from No. 2 bed where Vigoro was
used; the phosphate bed was good, but not comparable to either
of the others.

“We were delighted, for the college has been stressing cotton
seed meal as a fertilizer in this state for it is both cheap and
available. ”

Mrs. M. F. Bates writes “one thing I have tried with success
might help some one else. It is simply to use two small stones or
half bricks to hold the root firmly in the ground when planting a
new rhizome. They hold the moisture and also the day’s heat
through the night which is usually quite cold here in Duluth.”

A question from Mr. Linton of Florida brings up the fre¬
quently discussed point “How shall we treat the newly planted
novelty?” and, as the bearded iris is reputed as not successful
in Florida (with the exception of Kochi, albicans, and a few
others), I am rather at a loss to answer him.

In general the time of planting is most important. We avoid
the near approach of a prolonged drouth, of a period of freez-

[85]

ing and thawing, of heat and humidity. The plants, in other
words, make the best growth (and avoid rot) in a good loam, with
moderate moisture and moderate (at least for the south) heat.
Frequently the new rhizome is planted actually in a layer of light
loam or even sand as a precaution against rot ; then the new roots
can get nourishment from the good loam (or even a forkful of
rich manure) below.

Additional precautions are taken if the rhizome is at all soft
or diseased. Dusting with a copper carbonate compound or flour
of sulphur are usual recommendations. It is well also to remem¬
ber that sun-drying is a cure-all.

It is only when we plant at the wrong season that we develop
our own pet theories of culture. Some plant in sand or coal
ashes for drainage. Some always plant in frames or pots to per¬
mit careful shading, watering, or protection from cold.

The plants clearly do not like planting before flowering though
English experiments with March planting proved a big increase
in growth and bloom the SECOND flowering season thereafter.
Like other bulbs they can be planted immediately after blooming
UNLESS that precedes a bad drouth in which case planting at
the beginning of the fall rains (as in the middle south) is to be
preferred. In Florida I would expect to pick the coolest season
and try to avoid both excessive heat and moisture. A couple
of months of even less should give a well-established plant.

“ Salable Rhizomes”

There are always complaints of sorts as to what a customer re¬
ceives and it is frequently justified perhaps but it is even more
frequently a natural and almost unavoidable variation in growth
habits.

The size of a rhizome may be typically pencil-like as in 7. cns-
tata or pumila or extremely fat as a nubbin or series of nubbins.
Even among the bearded irises there is a marked increase in size
as we compare a variegata, a pallida, or a mesopotamica or cy-
priana strain, in fact, Californian grown roots of the latter may
be as big as your wrist.

Again season affects the appearance of our purchase. Either in
early spring or after flowering when new growth begins with the
first rains, the nubbin may be thickly studded with thrifty sprouts.
A bit later the single rhizome may show only one sheaf of leaves

[86]

(often enclosing the flower bud) and the new sprouts will develop
in our own garden instead of in the nursery. One may be sus¬
picious of getting next year’s flowers if the new rhizome is double¬
pronged and none too husky, whereas if it be strong two stalks of
bloom are to be expected. The single rhizome with a strong sheaf
is perhaps the ideal salable plant and the less alive the feeding
roots seem, the better, as you have hit just the season for new
growth to start and the shock of moving is just that much less.
Incidentally, I always break up a clump of prongs into indi¬
viduals regardless of their size.

To secure an even stand of ideal salable rhizomes is not easy
(even when the customer desires shipment at the right season for
the nursery). Both the demand and the supply of any given
variety is variable. The big, ready-to-bloom, rhizome is ready at
a certain period of its growth. You may find a good proportion
of them in an old clump or in a new planting, the source is un¬
important.

Aside from these vagaries of a variety or of a growing season
there are certain practical points to be considered. It is better
for the customer to receive a root at the time he wants it even
if it is not in its best condition. (This suggests that buying in
your own locality and letting the grower select the date of ship¬
ment might be advisable.) If the variety be very rare and ex¬
pensive the grower is not only assuming a big risk of loss but
must propagate intensively which means less matured (and hence
smaller) rhizomes. He cannot afford an extended correspondence
as to whether you would prefer the immature rhizome or prefer
to await its growth in his garden, and the result is you get a
“poor” root and pay a big sum. His alternative, not offering for
sale until the plants mature in sufficient quantity, usually means
no sale and there you are !

Complaints as to condition upon arrival are justifiable. Com¬
plaints as to plants not proving true to name when they flower are
also good. But think twice before you complain of size of roots
and think even a third time if you have tracked a special bargain
to its lair. It may be a real bargain but it is more likely to be as
false a bargain as one bought in the basement or over the counter.

Soil Conditions

Siberian, other beardless and bearded are all grown together in
my garden, or as I prefer to call it “my weed patch,” in soil

[87]

that varies from a heavy clay to light loam. No cultivation.
Practically no removal of dead foliage. Most of the beds are be¬
low level of the grass paths, except on edge of terrace. Must
note those nearest or at the terrace edge do not grow or bloom
nearly as well as those in the sunken beds.

In the heavier soil the beardless have lower stature and smaller
flowers. In the drier loose loam the bearded seem to lack sub¬
stance, perhaps better characterized as a softness due to lack of
moisture. Where moisture conditions are normal the bearded do
very well in either soil type. By normal I mean soil that some
would term too wet. AVhere beardless are kept actually wet,
growth is most luxurious and bloom better. I realize these could
use manure heavily to great advantage.

Preferably I like a soil for Siberian, ochroleuca , English bulbous,
pseudacorus and bearded to be rich in humus, and the richer this
may be is none too rich for the variegatas. For Spanish and
Dutch types, a loose very well drained soil, lacking humus is
best, with some sun shelter for the former, as they are latest to
bloom.

I do not use lime. I abhore its use in the iris garden because
invariably when present accidentally or otherwise, I lose many
of my plants through rot. This of course eliminates from my
patch such iris which according to all known sources of informa¬
tion must have lime to flourish.

Iris sintenisii is happily at home in a spot near a wall, which
is a little lower than elsewhere along that wall, in soil light and
sandy in texture, but subsoil of clay, western exposure. Other¬
wise it receives the same treatment as the others, commercial
fertilizers, bone meal, humus, ammonium sulphate, rotting foliage
and well rotted manure.

Coas. E. F. Gersdorff.

TID-BITS 36TH

■ Color. As quoted from Science News Letter. “Prof. Hal¬
dane formulated his theory as follows:

“1. In the perception of either color or brightness our vision
as a whole is always active; there is no merely objective cause of
color or brightness.

“2. In this active perception we can distinguish the coordinated
maintenance of color and complementary color, as well as bright¬
ness and darkness, in the field of vision.

“If his theory be true, the assumption on which Galileo and
Newton founded physics, that ‘our sense organs are simply recep¬
tive of various kinds of impressions from a surrounding physical
world ’ does not cover the facts. Newton, in his ‘Opticks, ’ had
assumed that the color of any light depended solely on its re-
frangibility, or wavelength. Prof. Haldane showed with experi¬
ments that he could make light which, by the law of physics,
ought to be yellow, turn blue, white, green, or any other color,
merely by changing the whole of its background.

“A small area of a white screen lit by a daylight lamp appeared
blue when viewed through a hole in another screen lit by a yel¬
low lamp, and green when the front screen appeared to be white,
although actually it was still lit by the red lamp.

“It is necessary for an object to be given the eye’s whole at¬
tention if its ‘true’ color is to be determined.”

Perhaps we laymen are not so far wrong after all when we
label a variety as “blue” or “pink” as “apricot” or “almost
red.” We are gradually beginning to acknowledge the probable
effect of soil and light on the color of a variety. We know that
some people are curiously color blind in part. Perhaps hereafter
we should not think that all makers of catalogs or originators
were merely judging their colors through rose-hued glasses but
rather, consider that they had not ignored the background (or
foreground) that influenced their seeing quite honestly.

I certainly remember many a seedling that seemed magnificent
the first year and a mere also ran the second.

Ratings. As the 1934 Policy of Awards has not yet been pub¬
lished in a Bulletin I would assure you all that the suggestions
of Mrs. Horton (and of a great many others) have been not only
considered but frequently incorporated: viz. Irises are not judged

[89]

on first year bloom ; ratings are not published unless five or more
judges vote; the Dykes Medal is given only the 5th year after
introduction.

The suggestion that ratings be marked as Temporary or Per¬
manent seems an unwanted confusion. It was done in one of the
early symposiums and we have also tried out the keeping of
separate ratings for garden or cut-flower effect. Much as I dis¬
like the whole question of ratings and awards I must confess
that many solutions were tried out in the early years of the So¬
ciety and that, in recent years, the Award Committee has devoted
an unconscionable amount of time to a fair consideration and
acknowledgment of divers schemes which, in themselves, were of¬
ten completely contradictory. The difficulty is a practical one ;
is it possible to judge each year or even within three years 250
new varieties?

“Fire Blight. ” Occasionally and apparently in every garden,
a plant yellows and, on investigation, reveals a perfectly sound
rhizome but not a single healthy feeding root. Normally we can
afford to burn the plant at once (it does not seem to be either
infectious or contagious), but Mr. C. G. White sends in the fol¬
lowing helpful suggestion.

“A similar something is common in Oncocyclus and Regelias.
The orange growers are using sulphate of zinc and lime for mottled
leaf and I tried the same on a few plants. Now the interesting
thing is that in digging these diseased clumps (the leaves striped)
the roots were surprisingly healthy. I have no proof that zinc is
either a remedy or a preventative but an observation of one year
makes for an interesting speculation.

“The formula is: 2 parts zinc sulphate; 1 part hydrated lime.
About 3 pounds to 200 square feet. It takes several months for
results to show.”

New Jersey Notes, from Mrs. Mechling. “Jersey does do
things to iris. I found that out to my cost some twenty years
ago. I had stopped in to see Mr. Farr’s irises and fallen in love
with Wyomissing (you remember what a dainty thing it was, with
delicate pink pencilings). When it bloomed for me it was bleached
out and faded, bereft of charm ; shade, richer soil — nothing helped
so I g’ave it to a Pennsylvania friend and lo! Wyomissing was its
lovely self again.

“What fun I had twenty years ago wheedling irises from the
Pennsylvania Dutch farmers’ wives! One farm yard had the
path to the pig pen bordered by alternating clumps of golden
ochroleuca and purple orientalis sanguinea, a really regal effect.
If “milk fed” fowls cost more, what price “iris-outlook pigs?”

New England Notes. Your editor ran about a bit trying to
rate varieties this spring and in the running observed a few
Massachusetts gardens. Nearest to his “iris home,” the Glen
Road Iris Gardens, is that of Mr. Donahue, a riverside garden
of rich alluvial soil. There are broad grass paths, arching trees,
and, on rising slopes, stone terraces. The garden stretches along
the water behind two or three old colonial houses. There are
peonies and hemerocallis and many perennials scattered through
the iris plantings. It is here that delicate, well-poised beauties
grow into lush, coarse giants of no distinction. It is here also
that you find real beauties better grown than even at Freeport
(my present idea of real growth).

Not far away is Mr. Gage’s garden, a cleanly cultivated back¬
yard, each plant well labeled and allowed to develop into a fine
clump. Only treasures are to be found and the poor variety,
even a seedling, soon lands in the rubbish heap. From this small
area come outstanding varieties — among them Gloriole and Mary
Dee Donahue and a still unnamed beauty.

Mr. McKee is at Worcester and his backyard reminded me of
that of Mr. Wassenberg in Van Wert as I saw it ten years ago;
broad grass paths, a garden feature or two and solid beds of irises.
It was a high class small collection, finely grown, and the seed¬
lings to my mind with a bit too strap shaped falls. You remem¬
ber that my usual comment on a dark variety is “not interested.”

Mrs. Nesmith at Lowell has a collection easily comparable to
that of Mrs. Pattison. The old garden rises behind the house
and through rose arches you go into the old orchard — now filled
with beds of hemerocallis, Louisiana irises, and a long border of
perennials where the Globe Thistle towers in early August. I
have never seen her “field” but I feel completely at home in her
mixed garden plantings and am constantly wandering off to see a
new Oriental poppy or yellow day lily instead of rating an iris.
Here I saw Gudrun, a big floppy pale thing, and Parthenon,
again too big and coarsely whiskered for my taste, Golden Hel¬
met, a strong rich yellow bronze that I want to see it another year,

[91]

despite its dark tones. In a way 1 find this a much better place
to judge than Freeport; there is a greater variety and the plants
are probably less well-grown and are certainly in smaller clumps.
The blooms are, however, in mass and well-branched and budded
stalks are characteristic of the variety. I think it is the foliage
and increase that is less vigorous. It is also a pleasure to find
colonies of wild irises and of favored old varieties to compare
to the so-called novelties.

Concerning Plicatas

I feel inadequate to say anything that would be of any particu¬
lar interest on the subject of plicatas. If I recall it correctly, I
spoke, rather mentioned in my letter that I had several rather
interesting seedlings in that section. Such is the case, but I took
no pictures of these individually, never dreaming that I would
later want them. I do, however, recall a few which I will attempt
further on to describe, though it may have to be in a limited way.

In the early spring of ’32, while away from home, a friend
brought to me some publications of one kind and another to while
away sadly distressed and lonely hours of anxiety in the evenings.
Knowing my great interest in irises — that was the subject. I
copied extracts from an article by Mr. Sturtevant in Societe
Nationale d ’Horticulture de France. In looking over these notes
I find the following: “Only by pedigree breeding through a num¬
ber of generations can we hope to secure plicata in first genera¬
tion.” Preceding this statement I should have quoted: “From
our records, a plicata X plicata has but once produced a plicata,
whereas - — - ’ ’

Even under the then circumstances, those statements caught my
interested attention, because of Mr. Sturtevant ’s informed au¬
thority and certain facts as I knew them. In 1929, I planted
seeds of Sherbert, Mine. Chobaut and others that I do not now
recall —all chance — however; a few of these germinated but from
them I had no bloom until ’31 that claimed particular attention.

One of these, a pleasing blended plicata, afterwards registered
as Sweet Cicely. This was a first generation and from an un-
known cross.

Of those blooming in season of ’34, all were first generation
except on which was from Sweet Cicely X Unknown pollen. That

[92]

was neither pedigreed breeding nor no more than the second gen¬
eration. I should not have said all because I note from my record
that there were also two differing plicatas in first generation from
Mme. Chobaut X Jubilee. Another season I hope to have some¬
thing interesting from Sweet Cicely X Amber— another second
generation, but I am to write of those that I’ve had rather than
things hoped for !

There was one tall slender beauty of good size, with a decidedly
yellow ground, pleasingly marked in a purplish brown (or ma¬
roon?), becoming a deeper yellow on hafts — style branches and
rather vivid because of deep golden beard. The markings did
not include the usual stitching. This was a greatly admired flower
and I regret that in transplanting I lost its parentage. I think
it came from a pink X unknown pollen, but not knowing defi¬
nitely, I cannot say that is this or that. Other plicatas in first
generations are from Little Dorritt (Benners) X Medrano — a light
yellow or peach colored ground, S. & F., brownish purple mark¬
ings with a brilliant beard — a feature characterizing most of them
so far. The Chobaut X Jubilee seedlings had the ruffled stand¬
ards of pollen parent and similar markings — one with white beard
but not exciting. None of these were overly large flowers but
with one exception they each had good form and substance.

There were two first generation plicatas with pink lavender
markings from Imperator X Unknown pollen — another similar
but entirely unknown parentage, but blues — on Parisiana style.

Still another, Imperator X White Sister, gave a blended back¬
ground with mulberry markings; the same plant giving two bloom
stalks, each different, but not of equal value.

The next and last that I now recall sufficiently to mention is a
tall two-toned pink X Sunset. In shape, this made me recall at
once that of Bose Dominion. I think and speak of it as that
“ queer thing” with the texture of a Cape Jasmine unmentioned
as exceptions only go to prove the rule.

These have been inadequately described I know, but there was
so little time to make exhaustive notes — garden visitors can be
equally a joy and interference — and I never dreamed that I would
wish that I had kept a more minutely detailed description.

Mrs. W. H. Benners, Balias , Texas.

From An Illinois Garden

Yon ask how I arrange my iris. I have them in clumps all
along* the edges of the garden with some taller ones farther back.
Between and immediately back of the clumps are such things as
columbine in quantity, polemonium — both the blue and the white
— pale and deeper pink pyrethrums (with pale blue or white iris),
coral bells with white, blue or certain deep red irises, and bleed¬
ing heart near blue or white. I am particularly fond of white
gas-plants near almost any iris, and the pink is not at all a bad
color used near pure white or pale blue.

As we go about the garden perhaps you will notice, here and
there, the foliage of astilbes, Japanese anemones, or low shrubby
chrysanthemums between some of the clumps of iris, or a bit of
Nepeta mussini claiming a position in front of White Knight, or
over there before Desert Gold, with Ariel nearby. Placed thus,
its wandering stems will all come forward and not smother the
iris, for it is a tractable plant, as you know.

You ask, too, about some favorite garden combinations. There
are so many ! None very unusual, perhaps, but since you troubled
to ask, I’ll mention a few like Bruno snuggled under an old yel¬
low garden rose (Harison’s, no doubt). They may open on the
same day, as they did this year, or the rose may be a bit later.

A certain accidental arrangement enchants me : Kingfisher Blue
(Sib.) stands tall and proud beside the pool, and back of it, four
or five feet, in reality, and about eight inches higher than the
iris, but from the house or the terrace, appearing as a quite close
background, is a large and beautiful soft yellow columbine. They
form a charming picture and one that was not planned.

I like a moss of pale pink single garden pinks — clove pinks, I
believe they are sometimes called — before pale blue iris. And, by
the way, in masses, this way the pinks command the attention and
admiration of all visitors, I find, and their fragrance is delicious.
In my own garden, I have three such clumps, one before Corrida
and La Neige iris, with blue flax ( Linum perenne) floating its
slightly deeper Corrida-blue fairy flowers above and between the
iris. The grouping seems to please everyone.

Another mass of the pinks is before Castilia, a pale blue of the
late Mr. E. B. Williamson which has a delightfully clear tone.
Realm stands not far away, with a creeping Chinese Juniper be¬
tween all of them on a bank, sort of “flowing over” from top
to bottom.

[94]

Do you use irises for cutting at all ? I find La Neige, just men¬
tioned, pleases me more than almost any other for this purpose.
Its texture is so waxy and its substance so heavy. Then, too, its
flowers are so bunchy in arrangement and this garden fault be¬
comes a cut-flower charm in this particular case, for as one bloom
fades and is removed, another one opens so close to the original
position that the arrangement, itself, is seldom spoiled. A low
white or black bowl of it just under a lighted lamp makes an
exquisite picture.

My first T. B. iris to open is always a certain “Early Blue,” as
I call it, having received it, nameless, from a friend. A quite
common old variety it is, for I see it often in other gardens, but
no one can ever tell me its name. It is a deep blue bicolor and I
have a large mass of it far back in the garden with a clump of
Aegir tulips flaming before it. The picture is a vivid one, but most
attractive. The tulips are a deep pink — almost red.

This same Early Blue is massed beneath a fairly large planting
of Persian lilacs — another pleasing combination, and one that
makes an effective arrangement in a large bowl, for the house,
also.

Another color blending that I’d like to see is Kochii or Purple
King beneath wild crabs. They bloom together here, and should
make a lovely combination — possibly with a bit of Bluet to com¬
plete the picture. Unfortunately my crabs are in front of the
house and so situated that growing flowers beneath them would
not do at all, so I must be satisfied with a mental picture. Pos¬
sibly there or some similar coloring bloom with some of your pink
cherries in Washington? If so, someone may have tried the effect.

I’m fond of Mrs. Perry’s Oriental Poppy back of pale blue or
deep blue purple iris— or soft reds. Mid-season varieties should
be used.

Iceland poppies come early and stay throughout the summer if
kept from forming seed, and they combine well with almost any
clear colored iris. Deep orange poppies with Primrose, Celinda
(a warm white) or White and Gold; golden poppies with Brandy¬
wine or Gleam, or with Madam Gaudichau, Tropic Sea, or Tene-
brae. Candlelight or Asia would be delightful with these yellow
poppies were they not so tall. Blue Velvet with Coronation and a
few orange poppies make a pleasant grouping. And white Iceland
poppies — satiny and delicate — with everything. They lighten a

[95]

planting that might otherwise be too solid, as does Garden helio¬
trope ( Valeriana officinalis) for the taller iris. Indeed I have
this latter all about the garden (this is no effort, of course, for
it seeds itself about so prolifically — the trouble is in keeping its
numbers sufficiently reduced). Columbine, too, and lavender rue
( Thalictrum aquilegif olium) serve this same purpose of lighten¬
ing the planting, and Shasta daisies. I have the early midseason
and late varieties of these and find them a continual joy all
through the summer.

I find the foliage contrast of most of these plants with the iris
of almost as much interest as that of the flower color or form.

The pale pink single peony Madeline Gautier opens with me a
little later than iris midseason. Pavane, a dark red velvet iris,
looks well with it. Numa Roumestan is nearly on another side
with Marjorie Tinley not far away.

Were these peonies so placed that I could use tall iris behind
them, I’d like to move Souvenir de Loetitia Michaud there with
perhaps the lower and darker Veloute in front, and perhaps a
white with a slightly pinkish tone — I’ve a seedling that’s just
right — for the peony fades to almost white as it ages.

I like forget-me-nots, too, before strong growing pink, white, or
yellow iris, in varieties not too tall; say, Susan Bliss or Rhein-
gauperle for the pinks, Sophronia, Snow White or White Queen
for the whites, and for yellow, Primrose, Pluie D’Or, or Aurea
(that old, old iris whose color has not yet been improved upon,
to my mind, by any of the gorgeous new yellows that I have seen
— ’Wonderful as they are). A little care will keep the forget-me-
nots from overrunning the iris rhizomes and if vigorous varieties
are chosen, a temporary oversight of the matter, or an absence
from home will not cause ruin to the iris. The forget-me-nots will
carry on the blooming season after the iris are gone also. I es¬
pecially like the pink and blue combination for the contrast makes
the iris seem pinker than it really is — and with white iris the com¬
bination is very fresh and crisp looking.

Mrs. Fred Glutton, Highland Park, III.

From a New Jersey Garden.

In 1927, August, I bought six bulbs apiece of Anton Mauve
and Albert Cuyp. The first was described as “ pearl blue,” the

[96]

second as “white with yellow blotch.” As they sounded entirely
different, I thought there could be no confusion if I planted them
closely side by side. I have learned from experience what miser¬
able confusion arises when the gardener plants two similar color¬
ings of anything side by side, and has maybe one flower from
the edge of one group, right in the middle of the double group,
and can’t possibly say which variety it is. This bit of knowledge
is perhaps my best contribution to the gardening world, but does
not help much where varieties aren’t true to name. Certainly
great confusion arose here. My notes for the following bloom
season were naturally based on what colors I looked for. I had
lovely flowers, three of them, not very big, delightful shapes and
texture, bluish, yellowish, with deeper blotch. I assumed this
was Anton Mauve. I had no white flowers, therefore, assumed
that Albert Cuyp had winter-killed, and bought six more bulbs.
The following year, my record states that Mauve, so called,
bloomed May 28, and Cuyp, so called, May 28 ; that they were
practically identical ; that Cuyp was possibly a bit less colorful
as to lavender, but that it was the better bloomer — nine flowers
from six bulbs. I decided the whole lot were Anton Mauve, and
under that name recorded all later blooms — nothing in 1930 and
1931, but one flower in 1932 and one in 1933, very permanent for
a Dutch Iris.

Now in the American Iris Society Bulletin of January, 1934,
Mr. B. Y. Morrison describes Albert Cuyp as of just the color¬
ing of my flowers. Can he throw any light on this puzzle? What
have I? Mauve, or Cuyp, both or neither? And, why must
dealers describe wrongly ? And, why must they sell untrue stock ?
I dislike puzzles unless there are solutions. I dislike them any¬
way! After such a muddle, I hesitate to call anything by name,
but the following notes are correct as far as I know.

1928. David Teniers, June 3 — I think only two flowers from
six bulbs. Very good shape — the same coloring as above — bluish
and yellow ; but the yellow in falls and blotch was deeper.
Bloomed again the next year which few do here.

1930. Heemskerk — ten bulbs, two flowers, one in little cold
frame, May 13 ; one in open, May 26. Big, lovely, ruffled shape —
deep yellow, especially falls. Huchtenburg — ten bulbs, nine flow¬
ers, a superb record, four flowers in little cold frame, May 15,
five in open, May 27 until June 5. Good shape and I think big

[97]

— wonderful coloring— palest gray ; bronzy orange ; styles pale
yellow — by far the loveliest Dutch Iris I have seen. Rembrandt
— five bulbs, one good and one poor flower — beautiful, a darker
blue than most, but not as good grower here (of an earlier plant¬
ing of six bulbs, only one poor pale flower). White Excelsior —
six bulbs, three flowers — May 27 until June 5 — creamy white,
then pure white — gold blotch. Yellow green stain up back of
falls. Very lovely, second only to Huchtenburg in beauty.
Therese Schwartz — six bulbs, one poor flower, June 1. Small.
Narrow petals — not quite white, a faint wash of lilac in standards.

1931. Wedgewood — five bulbs, one fairish flower May 21—
wonderful that it bloomed at all for it was planted on March 22 ;
a lavender blue exactly matching the type form of S cilia cam-
panulata. Frans Hals — five bulbs, seven flowers (the big bulbs
had broken up into many small in planting). May 25, opened
very round and compact. S. fall blue, deeper as flower developed,
sometimes a lovely hint of grey like Huchtenburg ’s ; F. pale
yellow. Big gold blotch — a vigorous and lovely variety. D. Har¬
ing — five bulbs, four good flowers and one defective bud May 30.
Good size — long, slim flower. S. white, just touched with laven¬
der. F. cream with small gold blotch. Second only to Frans
Hals in this 1931 set. Adrian Backer — five bulbs, one flower,
May 31. S. a very good soft lavendar blue; F. and styles the
faintest possible blue. (I am sorry that the two light “blue”
seifs, so needed in this group, AVedgewood and Adrian Backer,
seem not very good growers). Poggenbeek— five bulbs, one flower
May 31. Good size — rather long petals. I had expected a deep
blue, like the Spanish Iris, King of the Blues. This is much
lighter, I think. S. are much deeper than F. ; yet the whole
flower is of a definite blue. Long slim gold blotch. I wish 1
might have been able to compare this with Rembrandt. I think
the latter is a little deeper blue — all this 1931 set were in a small
cold frame, which was not of the best color.

Complete failures here, not one flower from any were Jan de
Bray, J. AVeissenbruch, David Bles, Theode Boch (each of them
planted only once), and Hart Nibbrig (planted four times).

The best varieties were Huchtenburg, AVhite Excelsior, Frans
Ilals, D. Haring and the Anton Mauve-Albert Cuyp puzzle.

Iris unguicularis — complete failure from two plantings. Then,
in 1927, I bought two more plants, put them in a better place and

[98]

protected with a small cold frame for the winter, airing occasion¬
ally. The first flower appeared on April 12 — not my idea of a
winter bloomer. It was not even very pretty and lasted only
one day in a vase. A fairly deep blue-lavender, gold and white
at the haft, back of falls gray. About a week later, three more
flowers. The second winter, no protection but leaves and both
plants died.

Iris unguicularis alba — failure from first planting. Then, in
1927, one plant in cold frame with the two blues. In 1928, it
bloomed about April 19, a week later then the blues. A very poor
flower, small and thin, and it shared the fate of its companions
in the second winter. In my notebook, my callous comment
was : ‘ ‘ Glad to be rid of them all. ’ ’

Iris unguicularis angustif olia. The one planting was a failure.

Hermodactylus tuberosus — In two tries no bloom to report. In
the second attempt, November leaves were formed a month or so
after planting, and I thought I recognized a leaf in February,
a little over two years later. I tried these with a cold frame and
without one.

Agnes Fales Huntington.

Dean Hole’s Appreciation of the Japanese Iris

“Of all the plants which must be grown in contiguity with
water, either on its banks, or where it may be introduced when
required, Iris Kaempferi is the most beautiful. Our most gran¬
diloquent adjectives, our sesquipe dalia verba, are so enfeebled, as
I have shown, by their perpetual application to insignificant ob¬
jects, that they are altogether impotent. I shall not attempt to
describe it beyond a few simple details, but I shall never forget
my first introduction to a large bed in full flower, outside the
end of the lake at Newstead Abbey, where the water could be
admitted at will into the sluices between the rows of the iris.
The varieties selected in, and sent direct from Japan, were some¬
what like the Clematis in form, and were six to eight inches in
diameter, and were of diverse colours — white, rose, blue, purple,
grey, and crimson. They evoked a delicious surprise and excite¬
ment, very rarely enjoyed by one who has lived his life among
the flowers, and has seen most of the famous gardens of England,
Scotland, France and Italy, including La Mortola, which is to
me the most charming of them all. It was one of those happy

[99]

astonishments, which 'when they seldom come, they wished for
come’; and though the attraction was some distance from the
house, I was perpetually wandering to and fro, under an irresis¬
tible fascination, to this iris and apple of mine eye.”

From Our Gardens by S. Reynolds Hole, published in

London, 1890, by J. M. Dent & Co.

Quotation From Letter of Mr. Peter Barr to Dean Hole (1899)

“Iris Kaempferi will often thrive on ground which one would
not choose for it, and will fail on ground which one would have
supposed to be most congenial. At one time I bestowed a great
amount of trouble upon them, but was not so successful as when
I gave them a less anxious care .... Our Iris kaempferi was in
the driest part of the Tooting grounds this year (1899), and the
quantity of buds surpassed anything I have seen, but the flowers
were comparatively small. On one occasion I tried, as an ex¬
periment, a bed made of loam and peat, one part being exposed
to the sun and the other in the shade : The former had plants
three and four feet in height, the latter were less and the flowers
few. I would recommend you to get some sleepers from the rail¬
way station, and to place them on bricks to secure drainage ; to
fill them up with a suitable compost to within three inches of the
surface, planting the iris a foot or eighteen inches each way, the
collar of the plant being level with the surface of the soil, which
must be kept open to catch all the sun’s rays in spring and
summer. In May they must have water, and if the weather is
dry, two good soakings in the week with a slight admixture of
mild manure, until they have ceased to flower.”

Commercial Influence.

“The chief beneficiaries are the Iris specialists,” was the com¬
ment about national and regional lists of recommended varieties,
by an executive of one of our State institutions. He may have be¬
lieved either that such tabulations primarily represent propaganda
for high-priced novelties of which a few growers have considerable
stock for sale ; or that the commercial votes are numerically suffi¬
cient or the point-scoring system prejudiciously designed, to give
such novelties high rank in their classes, regardless of any sterling
merits inherent in older and lower-priced favorites.

We disassociate ourselves from any conviction that the honest

[100]

opinions and the straightforward actions of our commercial special¬
ists are a questionable influence in the conduct of the affairs of the
Society. There is a loyalty to the Society, a loyalty to the commer¬
cial specialist’s better self, a loyalty to his amateur-member cus¬
tomers — and all three can coexist.

Before my interest in the Society was more than a desire to im¬
prove my own collection with such guidance as our Bulletin
afford, I had been for a considerable time a member of three or four
other societies for the improvement of flowers of other genera of
which I have long grown many varieties. And my belief is that the
integrity of our commercial-specialist members is second to that
of no commercial group in any other floral society within my ex¬
perience.

I have purchased rhizomes from various specialists from coast
to coast. With a single and perhaps excusable exception, their stocks
have later proved true to name with me. Invariably their rhizomes
have arrived well packed, labelled painstakingly and legibly, in
good condition, of satisfactory or better size, and clean as a hound’s
tooth. My special inquiries of them as to details about the quality
and growing habits of novelties of their offering have brought with¬
out exception, replies that have been found frank, straightforward
and dependable.

Face to face, I have met at least 12 of these commercial-specialist
members whose collective judgment as to the quality or merited rat¬
ing of any novelty, I would consider equally as reliable, if not more
reliable, than the collective judgment of any 12 of our non-commer¬
cial members with whom I have had face-to-face acquaintance.

Moreover, I do not believe that the percentage of human frailty
in trade is any greater than in any other reputable occupation or
profession.

While individual and corporate conduct of the normal course of
trade in America has long been controlled with relatively few ex¬
ceptions, by the highest standards of integrity, we can say as much
neither for certain less common trade practices without similar
sanctions, nor for local political ethics. Propaganda and camouflage
have been their specialties.

In New Jersey, for example, was offered the illuminating privi¬
lege, last year, of voting for a proposal simply described on the
ballot as a lawT “to improve the breed of horses.” Looking behind

[101]

that seeming simplicity, one found the mechanism to legalize race¬
track gambling. Thus the voters’ representatives were accessories
before the fact to camouflage, deception and concealment.

While any Iris breeder may lawfully publish only such facts as
he chooses about his seedling novelty ; while any commercial special¬
ist may lawfully withhold vital facts about a variety in the absence
of circumstances that place upon him an enforcible duty to dis¬
close them; nevertheless, it is, I believe, true that “intelligent self¬
concern is founded on service to others.” No longer is it intelligent
or even expedient to wink and say “Let the buyer beware.”

And while the By-Laws of our Society announce among the meth¬
ods by which to attain its stated major object, a purpose favorable
to the “encouragement of Iris breeding”; and while such encour¬
agement must necessarily presuppose opportunity for remunera¬
tion for breeders’ arduous labors and for commercial growers’ risks
by investment in stock of novelties; nevertheless, as stated both in
the declaration precedent to issuance of the Society’s Certificate of
Incorporation, and in its By-Laws, the first object of the Society is
declared to be “to promote the culture and the improvement of the
Iris.”

The still small voice tells me that if the declared method (“en¬
couragement of Iris breeding”) were found to be but a screen like
that “to improve the breed of horses”; if such method were but
a screen serving merely to put our amateur members in the position
of being unintending accessories to similar camouflage and conceal¬
ment of vital facts which gardeners must generally come to know if
a steadily widening acceptance and culture of the Iris is to be at¬
tained; if this were true (but it is not), how great would be the
flight of amateurs from the membership list !

For these reasons, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the
term “commercial influence” when used to connote the exercise of
undesirable or improper power or authority in the Society, I con¬
sider as exaggeration if not approaching invective.

It is suggested, however, that inspecific and vague if not evasive
and at best opinionative, adjectival tags such as “fine,” “wonder¬
ful” and “perfect,” when tied to form, texture, stalk, etc., do not
constitute explicit statements of fact within the letter or spirit of
standards for actual explicitness such as are shown on page 18 of
Bulletin No. 6.

And if it be alleged that the Bulletin doesn’t publish varietal

[102]

descriptions in the style of catalogues, as a reason for bine pencil¬
ing or rejecting compliances with those standards, then such a
reason or explanation would seem to be evasive ; for it is indeed an
exceptional catalogue that adheres to those standards of explicitness.

Further, I indulge the hope that more than a handful of our
commercial members, being themselves buyers of other breeder’s
novelties, may eventually support the adoption of a more definite
policy by the Society, for the publication in the Bulletin, of all
the vital facts about at least the highest-rated novelties, — -both the
unfavorable facts, if any, as well as the favorable ; both facts as to
averages of ratings and as to plant habits.

When I see varietal puffery that emphasizes only color and size
only when large, and which includes no, or almost no explicit state¬
ments of fact as to important qualities such as form, proportion,
floriferousness, increase, susceptibility to root rot, hardiness, branch¬
ing habit, growth, placement, height, substance, texture, etc., then
I think that perhaps I understand why some members have mental
reservations about what they think of as commercial influence.

The discontinuance of any intentional withholding of relevant
facts about novelties, is considered to be a necessary preliminary to
the fullest measure of success in our object, “to promote the culture
and the improvement of the Iris.” For in ratings of Irises, as in
decisions at law as Mr. Justice Brandeis says: “Judgment should
be determined upon a consideration of (all) the relevant facts:
'ex facto jus oritur.’ ”

M. E. Douglas, N. J.

Between The Lines.

I have read Mr. Essig’s splendid article in the A. I. S. Bulletin
52 with a great deal of interest and would like to commend its
careful and thorough attention to detail as an example to all present
and future breeders of Iris — or breeders of anything for that
matter.

Breeders working in other regions will naturally lay their ex¬
periences side by side with those of Mr. Essig and while reading his,
will interpolate from their own, sometimes agreeing, sometimes dif¬
fering, a sort of running commentary between the lines. It is in
this manner that I am writing now.

His records showing that successful pollination can be had at
almost any time after the flower opens until the stigma fails, I

[103]

believe to be pretty closely limited. Probably this finding would ap¬
ply only to areas under irrigation, despite his specific mention of
cloudy and foggy days. Here in Washington, D. C., typical of the
humid East, with extremely heavy dews in the mornings and with
frequent rains, I believe the time for successful pollination to be
quite limited, probably to a few hours of each sunny day.

And in the matter of curing seed after harvest we of the East
must pursue a slightly different technique if we are to prevent mold¬
ing of the seed. Here it is usually advisable to remove the seed as
soon as the pods begin to open, and spread them in thin layers in
an airy position so that drying may be hastened. If not so handled
they will remain moist for a long time and not infrequently become
covered with mold. Whether this affects germination unfavorably I
have never learned with certainty but I prefer to get them dried
before any fungus growth of this kind takes possession.

In Mr. Essig’s concluding paragraph there is a rather arresting
statement that “In many cases there were a number of desirable
ones from the same pod and it appears that all are either good,
fair, or poor.” (The italics are mine.) By and large this experi¬
ence tallies quite well with my own wherein one small family yielded
Sequoiah, Coppersmith, and L’Aiglon, all one-time winners of II. M.
from the A. I. S. A duplicate later breeding of the same parents
also produced uniformly superior progeny though not greatly
widening the range shown in the first. Other families have been
only medium in quality without a really outstanding individual,
again bearing out the Essig conclusion.

But neither theoretically nor practically can we accept this con¬
clusion as more than a broad generalization. In my own practice
I have accepted it to the extent that I do not care to produce thou¬
sands or even hundreds of seeds of an untried parental combina¬
tion. A small family, with much less labor and space required, may
indicate pretty well what may be expected from that specific com¬
bination. But failure to work well together should not be looked
upon as a condemnation of either parent separately. Each, used in
some other combination, may result in superior progeny. The real
problem of breeding is to find parents that will supplement each
other, fill each other’s deficiencies.

Theoretically — and practically — you may get a very superior
individual as the result of mating mediocre, or even extremely poor,
individuals, so long as any good qualities of different character re-

[104]

[See Page 108]

FROM DR. FREDERICK HANES

main inherent in both parents. Any offspring that should by chance
inherit all the good qualities of both parents, is thereby necessarily
superior to either of its parents — but it may take many thousands,
possibly a million, throws of the dice for this one fortuitous com¬
bination to turn up.

In like manner, two outstanding individuals, again with good

[105]

qualities reciprocal rather than duplicating, will produce mostly
highly superior progeny— but in the same number of thousand or
million descendants there may occur the one case in which all the
less desirable qualities of both parents are combined in one indi¬
vidual which will then be necessarily inferior to either parent. In
so complex a subject as the Iris none of us produce families running
up into the millions required for ready demonstration of these ex¬
treme theoretical possibilities, but their existence is merely a mat¬
ter of mathematics.

In speaking above of “good qualities” in a parent I would have
the reader think not solely of the qualities actually apparent in the
particular variety under consideration, but of those desirable qual¬
ities that have been prevalent in its ancestral picture covering as
many generations back as possible. These are the qualities that may
really be counted on in building improvements for the future.
And finally, let all breeders, experienced or inexperienced, hard¬
ened criminal or first offender, take a leaf out of Mr. Essig’s book
and keep a complete record of all performances.

J. Marion Shull.

Irises in the House.

It is always interesting to see arrangements of bearded iris in
the house and this charming picture shows the use of leaves with
flowering stalks that might well be studied, since it brings out
the essential growth characters of the plants that rarely show if
one uses only flowering stalks or leaves cut singly.

[ 106 ]

OUR BULLETINS

Descriptions — Nos. 6, 7, 9, 12, and 29. Price, as a Set, $2.50

Descriptions of Bearded Irises may be deadly dull but they are
like the Alphabetical Iris Check List ($1.50) most convenient for
reference. Of course, in both cases one would prefer a volume
that was thoroughly up-to-date rather than a bunch of bulletins
but as long as the iris interest remains alive there will be new
varieties to name and describe each year.

Of even greater importance and particularly to the newer mem¬
bers are the methods of describing, the definitions of terms, the
classification as to color, or season, branching or form. It is only
when we look closely at an iris that we begin to appreciate not only
how different they may be but how much fun it is to attempt to
describe, in words, just what these differences actually are and
how we may value them. Both we (and the catalogs) say a variety
is the finest pink, most beautiful, splendid or what you will but
after we have called ten, twenty or a hundred varieties “fine” we
are beginning to wish for a bit of variety, a bit of knowledge as to
the truth and if true, then why. We may still like the variety
but, as with real friends like it despite its faults.

As it happens these bulletins carry other notes of interest ; The
Bulbous Irises, the Work of William Mohr; original observations
on bud development, root growth, and forcing; and our first com¬
pilation on Chromosomes ; in addition to the current notes on
varieties and garden uses.

I wonder is it that I am getting old (in iris lore) or is it a com¬
mon failing to get more kick out of the past (bulletins) and the
hows and wliys and by whoms the present (irises) developed?

The Society now has a supply of leaflets giving list of all
Bulletins published in the past and still available to members.

There is also listed the available supply of other publications
that may be had. A copy is yours free if you ask for it. Please
address the American Iris Society, 1918 Harford Avenue, Balti¬
more, Md. Remember the address.

[107]

COMMERCIAL DIRECTORY

D. M. ANDREWS

Iris: Gilead, Rusty Gold and
Other Indispensables

BOULDER COLORADO

CHERRY HILL NURSERIES

Thurlow and Strangers, Inc.

Fine Peonies, Iris, Phlox and
Perennials

WEST NEWBURY MASS.

FAIRMOUNT IRIS
CARDENS

Rare Bearded and Beardless Iris
New Hemerocallis and Poppies

LOWELL, MASSACHUSETTS

FILLMORE CARDENS

FINE IRIS AND PEONIES
MRS. MABEL WERNIMONT

OHIOWA NEBRASKA

MELVIN G. CEISER
IRIS

Peonies and Tulips
Fair Chance Farm

BELOIT KANSAS

GLEN ROAD IRIS
GARDENS

Miss Grace Sturtevant

Outstanding Novelties

Standard Varieties

WELLESLEY FARMS MASS.

HEARTHSTONE IRIS
CARDENS

M. Berry Doub
Fine Iris Growers

Introducing "Hearthstone Copper”
HAGERSTOWN MD.

HILL IRIS AND PEONY
FARM

The Best in Irises

Our Specialty: Reliable Fall Bloomers
LAFONTAINE KANSAS

THE IRIS GARDEN

SELECTED BEARDED
IRIS

OVERLAND PARK KANSAS

LONGFIELD IRIS FARM

Williamson Originations
Best Bearded Varieties and Species

BLUFFTON, INDIANA

C. S. MILLIKEN

SUNNYSIDE GARDENS

Southern California Iris Gardens

Introducers of Easter Morn, Lady
Paramount, Sierra Blue and Others

970 New York Ave.
PASADENA CALIF.

L. Merton Gage

New and Standard Varieties of Iris

NATICK - MASSACHUSETTS

NORTHBROOK CARDENS,
INC.

Peonies and Iris

THE TINGLE NURSERY
CO.

Azaleas, Boxwood, Magnolias and

World's Best Varieties

Other Choice Plants

Dundee Road Northbrook, Ill.

Tel. Northbrook 160

PITTSVILLE MARYLAND

OVER-the-GARDEN-WALL

Recent Bearded Iris

Various Species

60 N. Main Street

UPTON CARDENS

(Mrs. G. N. Marriage)

IRIS — New Hybrids
ALPINES — From Colorado Rockies

WEST HARTFORD CONN.

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO.

ROYAL IRIS CARDENS

TREHOLME CARDENS

Louisiana and Other Species

New Rare and Good Old Irises
Peonies of Distinction

Finest Bearded Iris

Earl Woodell Sheets, Owner

CAMILLUS N. Y.

1831 Lamont Street, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D. C.

QUALITY CARDENS

C. F. WASSENBERC

Owned by Mrs. Douglas Pattison

Iris and Peonies

Newest, Rarest and Finest Iris

Largest Collection in the Central
West

FREEPORT ILLINOIS

VAN WERT OHIO

CARL SALBACH

ROBERT WAYMAN

Introducer of Mitchell Iris

Also Dahlias, Gladiolus, and Seeds

657 Woodmont Avenue
BERKELEY CALIF.

IRISES

The Best of All Types

BAYSIDE, LONG ISLAND, N. Y.

JACOB SASS - SASS IRIS

Maple Road Gardens

IS THIS YOUR

Route 7, Benson Station

SPACE?

OMAHA

NEBRASKA

THE AMERICAN
HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY

IRISES

KATISHA, STANWIX—

INTRODUCTIONS FOR 1933

Fairylea (1933), Guyasuta (1931),
Edgewood, Elsinore, Lodestar, Sere¬
nade and other varieties.

Descriptive list on request.

C. H. HALL. Ingomar. Pa.

J. MARION SHULL

Artist, Plant Breeder, Specializing in

Iris

207 Raymond Street Chevy Chase, Md.

Productions include Coppersmith, Dune
Sprite, Elaine, Julia Marlowe, L’Aiglon,
Moon Magic, Morning Splendor, Nocturne,
Phosphor, Sequoiah, Sylvia Lent, Tropic
Seas, Waterfall.

Author, “Rainbow Fragments, A Garden
Book of the Iris.’’ Price $3.50

THE IRIS SOCIETY

(of England )

Application for membership in
The Iris Society may be sent direct
to the American Iris Society office.
Make check for dues ($2.85) pay¬
able to the American Iris Society.
Send it to Mr. John H. Ferguson,
Acting Secretary, 19 18 Harford
Avenue, Baltimore, Md. Mark it
plainly "For dues for The Iris So¬
ciety (of England)" and print your
name and address.

Robert Wayman’s
IRISES

1,200 Varieties
Hundreds of Rare Irises
Write for free planting list.

ROBERT WAYMAN

Box 26

Bayside, Long Island, N. Y

PROFITABLE PEONIES

HARMEL PEONY COMPANY

Growers of Fine Peonies Since 1911
BERLIN, MARYLAND

THE AMERICAN ROSE SOCIETY

INVITES

MEMBERS of the American Iris Society who also enjoy roses to
unite with it in improving and furthering the enjoyment of
roses throughout the world.

The American Rose Annual, sent to each member every year,
describes all the new roses and is packed with information and in¬
spiration for rose growers.

The American Rose Quarterly deals with current exhibitions,
meetings, rose pilgrimages, roster of members, etc.

"What Every Rose Grower Should Know,” the Society’s book
of instructions for rose-growing, is sent to each member.

The Committee of Consulting Rosarians will give free advice on
all rose subjects.

Dues $3.50 per Year; Three Years for $10.00

Address

SECRETARY, AMERICAN ROSE SOCIETY

Harrisburg, Penna.

SPECIAL NOTICE

Act quick if you desire a manual as at this low price
we expect to soon dispose of the balance of books on hand.
Address all communications and remittances to:

W. F. Christman, Secretary ,

American Peony Society,

Northbrook, III.

Tlie American Iris Society

♦

BULLETIN

OF THE

American Iris Society

DECEMBER, 1934
REPORTS AND BUSINESS, 1933

NO, 54

CONTENTS

Report of the President, John C. Wister . 1

Report of the Yice President, E. E. Everett . 3

Report of the Secretary, John B. Wallace, Jr . 6

Report of the Treasurer, Richardson Wright . 8

Regional Vice Presidents:

M. E. Douglas . . 10

J. C. Nicholls . 14

Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs . 16

Committee Reports :

Scientific Committee, Dr. A. E. Waller . 18

Iris Species in California, Prof. E. 0. Essig . 20

Display Gardens:

Plainfield Garden Club Iris Garden, Miss Earriette Ealloway . 24

Reports of Iris Shows, 1933, Mrs. W. L. Karcher . 28

Registrations for 1933, C. E. F. Gersdorff . 34

Introductions for 1933, C. E. F. Gersdorff . 47

Exhibition Policy and Management . 53

1934 Policy of Awards... . 68

Membership List, October 1, 1934 . 75

Published Quarterly by

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY, 1918 HARFORD AVE., BALTIMORE, MD.

Entered as second-class matter January, 1934, at the Post Office at Baltimore, Md.,

under the Act of March 3, 1879.

#3.00 the Year — 50 Cents per Copy for Members

Directors :

OFFICERS, 1934

Term expiring 1934 :

Sherman R. Duffy A. P. Saunders

Mrs. W. H. Peckham R. S. Sturtevant

Term expiring 1935 :

Term expiring 1936:

Mrs. J. Edgar Hires
B. Y. Morrison

Dr. H. H. Everett
Dr. J. H. Kirkland

John C. Wister

J. B. Wallace, Jr.
Richardson Wright

President — John C. Wister, Wister St. and Clarkson Avenue, Germantown,
Philadelphia, Pa.

Vice-President — Dr. H. H. Everett, 1104 Sharp Bldg., Lincoln, Nebr.
Secretary — Mr. John Ferguson, 1918 Harford Ave., Baltimore, Md.

Treasurer — Richardson Wright, House & Garden, Graybar Bldg., New York
City.

Regional Vice-Presidents —

2. Col. J. C. Nicholls, 114 Overton Rd., Ithaca, N. Y.

3. M. E. Douglas, Rugby Place, Woodbury, N. J.

4. J. Marion Shull, 208 Raymond St., Chevy Chase, Md.

5. Mrs. James R. Bachman, 2646 Alston Drive, Atlanta, Ga.

6. Dr. A. C. Kinsey, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.

7. C. P. Connell, 2001 Grand Ave., Nashville, Tenn.

8. Robert Schreiner, R. 1, Riverview Station, St. Paul, Minn.

9. Euclid Snow, R. F. D. 2, Hinsdale, Ill.

10. Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs, 3715 Turtle Creek Blvd., Dallas, Texas.

11. David C. Petrie, R. F. D. 2, Boise, Idaho.

12. Dr. P. A. Loomis, Colorado Springs, Colo.

13. Carl Starker, Jennings Lodge, Ore.

14. Prof. E. O. Essig, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.

15. William Miles, Ingersoll, Ontario, Canada.

Chairmen of Committees:

Scientific — Dr. A. E. Waller, 233 So. 17th St., Columbus, Ohio.

Election — Dr. C. Stuart Gager, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Membership and Publicity — Dr. H. H. Everett, 1102 Sharp Bldg., Lin¬
coln, Neb.

Registration — C. E. F. Gersdorff, 1825 No. Capitol St., Washington, D. C.
Test Garden & Display Garden —

Exhibition — Mrs. W. L. Karcher, 1011 W. Stephenson St., Freeport, Ill.

Bibliography — Mrs. W. H. Peckham, The Lodge, Skylands Farm, Ster-
lington, N. Y.

Awards — Dr. H. H. Everett.

Editor — R. S. Sturtevant, Groton, Mass.

Editorial Board:

S. R. Duffy

Mrs. J. E. Hires
Mrs. Lena M. Lathrop

Mrs. C. S. McKinney
B. Y. Morrison
R. S. Sturtevant

LANTERN SLIDES — Rental Fee (to members) #10.00. Apply to Mrs,
K. H. Leigh, Mo. Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Mo.

NEW YORK
BOTANICAL
GARDEN

THE AMERICAN IRIS SOCIETY

■ In presenting a separate bulletin in which might be recorded
the several matters that have to do with the business of the So¬
ciety it is the feeling of the officers that these can be made into a
record that need not be hidden among the bulletins’ texts that
more properly should devote themselves to the praise and promo¬
tion of the Iris.

It has been difficult to assemble precisely what was wanted and
the success is only partial. YTour patience is expected and your
cooperation invited to assure the correction of any errors and
to make certain that the extra bulletin for 1935 will be far better
than this one.

B. Y. Morrison, For the Secretary.

REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT FOR 1933

* The American Iris Society has come through the year with¬
out the large drop in membership that was feared and expected.
It also has a good bank balance and sound assets, both unusual
nowadays. The Bulletins have been most interesting. Represen¬
tation at the Annual Meeting was from eighteen states from
Maine to Texas to Minnesota to California. It was a tine Iris
year in many sections.

Two members of our board have been taken from us by death
during the year. Mr. E. B. Williamson died on February 25th.
A tribute to him was spread on the minutes of our April meet¬
ing and Bulletin No. 48 was dedicated to him. Mr. Franklin B.
Mead died on November 29th. He was a charter member, had
served as vice-president in 1924 and 1925; as Regional vice-
president from 1925 to 1927, and as director since 1928. He was
regular in attendance at meetings and always a good friend of
the Society.

During the year the perennial problem of a divided secretary’s
rj office, part in New Haven and part in Lancaster, has been solved
unexpectedly and happily by the willingness of Mr. B. lr. Mor¬
rison to take over the duties of both offices. He enters upon his
' ’ new work with the best wishes of all of us and with the heartfelt

“H

thanks of the two secretaries who preceded him, each with a
seven-year term. They know what a job it is and how thankless.
I hope the Board will express its thanks to Mr. Wallace in terms

[l]

vigorous enough to make him forget the lack of appreciation by
the disgruntled.

Emphasis on the number of years the two secretaries have
served brings me quite naturally to the many years I have served
as your president. I believe strongly in making the term long
enough so that the individual may have full opportunity of
carrying out his proposed program. I am grateful to the mem¬
bers of the Board and to other members who have helped me and
worked with me. To them I shall always owe thanks. But I have
felt for some time that the length of my term was unfair both to
the Society and to me. Therefore, I informed the directors a
year ago of my desire and determination to retire at the end of
fifteen years of service. That time is now only a year away and
I mention it again so that you may be reminded that I really
mean it and I beg you not to try to make me change my decision.
As you all know I have loved the work ; undoubtedly I shall miss
it in many ways. But I am positive that both the Society and I
badly need a change. It is not good for one person to bear the
load too long. The Societv will not suffer for good work cannot be
done by one who feels that the work has become an unfair burden.

This has been one of the most difficult years in our history.
Not only have the members been unusually critical, due perhaps
to their interest in the controversial subjects of awards and rat¬
ings, but members of the Board have disagreed with the policy
of the Society, of more than one committee and of various offi¬
cers. I was so troubled last winter that I called a special meet¬
ing in April to examine into the by-laws and to put in black and
white the various powers and functions of officers, committees,
etc., powers and functions which had grown up by custom and
which are understood by some and challenged by others.

After long discussion I put what seemed to be the sense of the
meeting into a four-paged mimeographed pamphlet which was
sent to all directors before the Freeport meeting and which in
the absence of further comments was confirmed at Freeport.
This statement should make the work easier in the future by
avoiding misunderstandings. I say should advisedly because al¬
ready there have been complaints that one committee has over¬
stepped its authority and that one officer has acted contrary to
the expressed policy.

John C. Wister, President.

REPORT OF THE VICE-PRESIDENT

■ It is presumed that a more or less personal slant on the ac¬
tivities of the Society in 1933 is not out of place from the Vice-
President. It is difficult to confine this report to that office alone
since the present incumbent was also the Chairman of the Com¬
mittee on Awards.

The Vice-President and Award Chairman wishes to express a
feeling of deep pleasure at the vast number of letters which have
reached him. Many letters are unfortunately unanswered, but all
have been read, considered, and many ideas have been used in
his letters to the directors, the award committee, the Regional
Vice-Presidents, and the accredited judges.

It has been hard to reconcile the varying viewpoints from
different sections in which iris are grown. Many of the prob¬
lems are still under consideration, and final decisions will be
reached after further correspondence and study by the directors.

I feel, individually, that too much stress has been placed on
rating, and the giving of awards. There has been some confusion
in the interpretation of the award policies. The directors clari¬
fied this situation, but did not feel it wise, without further de¬
liberation and discussion, to modify the existing code — that of
1933. I believe the methods of rating could be greatly simplified
with profit to all. It is too much to ask of any judge to spend

hour after hour, and day after day, in the broiling sun rating

iris. There are too many point divisions in the present score-

card to be minutely considered, as one goes through extensive

plantings. It becomes an insuperable task.

The most valuable information on any iris is not whether it
rates 85, 90, or 95, but whether it is frankly better than San
Francisco, Dauntless, or whatever may be an acknowledged
leader in its particular class. One must have a description of its
outstanding qualities, and more especially of its faults. Then
the average amateur can buy without any fear of making a mis¬
take in his purchase.

1933 brought a certain welcome restraint in the over-enthusiastic
introduction of new varieties. Breeders and growers were more
conservative, and have recognized that in the pages of almost
any catalog enough flue varieties of iris can be found to make a
garden wonderful beyond compare.

[3]

Climatic regional ratings are now under consideration. To aid
the committee to divide the country into zones, we must have
more and still more varietal notes and behaviorisms under vary¬

ing climatic conditions.

When submitting varietal notes be more charitable than you
have been. Don’t condemn an iris because it just won’t do with
you, nor should you think the introducer “crazy” for offering it.
You should know that somewhere it does splendidly. The fault
may lie with you, and your methods of culture, and not with the
iris itself. Dominion or Mesopotamica blood may, or may not,
contribute to its frailty. Hybridizers are now combining the
beauties of these two strains with the hardiness and prodigality
of the older varieties.

I cannot understand people saying variegatas will not do with
them. Why not try various conditions and places in your garden ;
I am sure you will find some spot where even a variegata will be
happy! Breeders in your region should strive to produce a stately,
hardy variegata for you.

It is apparent that many of the members have forgotten that
the iris is only a part of the garden picture, that just iris does
not make a garden. Let iris be your key, and build your garden
around it. Recognize the necessity of considering color combi¬
nations with other plants besides iris. Garden beauty does not
depend solely on colours; form and texture are essential factors,
design is even more important.

Mr. Morrison aptly expressed in a recent letter a conviction
which I have held for a long time, that your Society is not
merely the American “BEARDED” Iris Society.

There are untouched fields of endeavor in the hybridization and
utilization in our gardens of our native species and varieties.
Mr. Washington, Mr. Williams, and the few others who are doing
pioneer work in this field, are to be congratulated. No bearded
iris has the grace and poise and delicate beauty of a well grown
clump of the beardless. The dwarfer beardless have a daintiness
which is unknown to their bearded relatives. To our own native
iris we can add with profit the species which come from abroad,
and which have graced the meadows or hillsides of far off Siberia,
China, or Japan.

When as much time has been spent hybridizing the Apogons

[41

as there has been on the bearded type, when certain cultural diffi¬
culties have been met, then the demand for Apogons will surprise
our over-cautious dealers.

I often wonder if you, as members, realize that in your neigh¬
borhood you have a Regional Vice-President who stands ready
to help you with your problems, whether they be individual or
come from the little group to which you belong. The office of a
Regional Vice-President is not a decorative one, and should be
taken seriously by each and every one of the Vice-Presidents.
Your Bulletin tells you your own Regional Vice-President, write
to him for advice.

The value of a Society, such as ours, rests not in the flower
which we hold incomparable, but in the contacts and the friends
we make.

Now is the time to plan your iris pilgrimages. It may be only
a visit to the garden of your next door neighbor, or far away
by train or auto to a garden which you only know from the
pages of our friendly Bulletin or from the lips of some happy
pilgrim who has seen this garden and who has met its proud
owner.

Of course the high point of iris activities each year is the
Annual Show, here the most rabid fans gather for a day or two
of hospitality at the hands of some eager garden devotees, who
are keen to show you that beauty is not a thing confined to any
one region.

This brings me to a pet subject of mine — that of a “courtesy
garden.” By that I mean, the portion of some one’s garden
where iris can be sent for trial and where they can be assured
of the best of care, before they are sent back to the breeder
whose property they should remain. Public trial gardens have
not proven a success ; the chance for the loss of a valuable seed¬
ling is too great to trust it to any one but a profound lover of
the iris. In 1935 the Show will be held at Nashville, and I
suggest that you write Chancellor Kirkland or Mr. Connell, who
will be glad to find place for these beautiful and welcome guests.
In this way the A. I. S. Show can be made a truly National
Exhibition.

There are other gardens which are the mecca of iris fans dur¬
ing iris time reaching from sunny California to rockbound

Maine, to which seedling iris should be sent. I know that if this
plan was pursued by all hybridizers, we of the iris world would
know just where to go and no worthy iris would go unsung.

New iris would be readily available for judging, even the 5-year
period is all too short for distribution of an iris, and no one
can have all the iris in one’s own garden. This scheme would give
pause to breeders who rush to introduce just another “almost an
iris” in an already top-heavy market!

I want to emphasize a point in closing which some of you seem
to have forgotten — this A. I. S. of ours is a simon pure amateur
Society — dealers and growers exist because of you and for you,
and should recognize the fact.

H. II. Everett, Vice President.

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY

■ In making a Secretary’s Report for the calendar year of
1933, I believe a comment on the present membership to be
the most important fact to place before you.

The membership as shown by the November 15, 1933, report
from the Science Press Printing Company totals 885 members,
and inasmuch as what memberships that have come in since
that time were for 1934, I believe that this may be accepted as
the figure for this year. This compares with a membership of
954 in 1932, 1129 in 1931, 1233 in 1930, 1202 in 1929, 1225 in
1928 and 1044 in 1927.

You will note from these figures that our membership arrived
at a figure slightly in excess of 1200 in 1928 and staved approxi¬
mately the same for the years 1928, 1929 and 1930, but since
then has shown the decrease to be expected from the general
conditions.

In view of the fact that the decrease was no greater than the
officers anticipated, and is probably a smaller percentage of loss
than similar organizations incurred, who did not make any at¬
tempt to artificially stimulate their memberships, I believe that
the American Iris Society should be congratulated on having
held its membership as well as it has done, and I think that it
would be safe to assume that the low point has been passed with
1933.

Insofar as I know, the Society this year has failed to receive a

[6]

single Research Fund Membership, and I would like to recommend
to the directors that this form of membership be abolished and
that some new form of membership, which I would suggest call¬
ing a Garden Club Membership, be started, with sufficient in¬
ducements attached thereto to make an attractive proposition for
Garden Clubs throughout the country. Without giving very
serious thought to the subject, I would like to suggest that such a
Garden Club Membership would entitle a Garden Club to two
copies of our Bulletin, a discount of 50 per cent in the use of
our Lantern Slides, and a preference in the use of the Farr
Memorial Library.

It gives me great pleasure to say that this year only six of
the twelve complimentary memberships which were authorized at
my discretion have been used, and in all of these cases they
seemed to be greatly appreciated by the recipients, who had writ¬
ten in that they were forced to resign for financial reasons, and
I would recommend that you again authorize a dozen free mem¬
berships to be utilized by the Secretary for the year 1934.

I am unable to give any definite facts as to the amount of cor¬
respondence handled by the Secretary’s Office, but do not feel
that it has been greatly lessened in 1933 by the decrease in mem¬
bership, as inquiries from non-members have been on the increase.
I have attempted to give all such inquiries individual attention,
rather than to use form letters, and have sent out a membership
blank with every letter to non-members and believe that quite a
few new members have been obtained in this way.

In view of the fact that a new Secretary is taking office on
January 1, 1934, I believe that this is the proper time to call
the attention of the Directors to the fact that neither the Presi¬
dent, Secretary, nor Treasurer have ever made any charge to the
Society for postage, and while this item is perhaps not a large
one, nevertheless it is not businesslike, and I would suggest that
commencing with 1934 that all the officers be supplied with a
definite amount of postage and urged to put through a voucher
for more when expended.

In closing this, my last Report, I wish to express my thanks
and appreciation to the officers and directors who have assisted
me so greatly during my term of office, and have made the
work very pleasant.

John B. Wallace, Jr., Secretary.

[71

REPORT OF THE TREASURER

December 1, 1933

Cash Chemical Bank & Trust..
Cash Special Interest Account

Cash Farr Fund .

Bonds :

Cleveland Union . $1,000.00

Shell Pipe . 500.00

Northern Pacific . 500.00

Paramount Broadway . 1,000.00

National Dairy . 1,000.00

Liberty Bonds . 2,850.00

Farr Fund Bond . .

Iris Check List . 1,700.00

Less Sales . 345.15

2,747.05

293.50

392.47

0,850.00

500.00

1,354.85

TOTAL

PROFIT & LOSS STATEMENT
Six Months, June 1st to December 1st, 1933

INCOME

Annual Membership ....
Tri-annual Membership

English Society .

Check Lists .

Dykes .

Sale of Bulletins .

Advertising .

English Bulletins .

Slides .

Bank Interests .

Miscellaneous .

Income Farr Fund .

Income from Bonds .

White Endowment .

$342.00

8.50
24.91

7.50
11.30

24.50
287.50

2.00

16.00

2.53

16.65

12.50
154.85

25.00

TOTAL

$935.74

EXPENSE

Administrative

Stationery .

Steno and Type

Bulletins .

^Miscellaneous

$250.42

90.00

205.79

1,209.27

236.59

TOTAL

$1,992.07

NET LOSS

* Includes Bill of $214.77 for taking care of 1933 subscriptions.

[8]

$12,137.87

$1,056.33

COMBINED PROFIT & LOSS STATEMENT

One Year, December 1st, 1933, to November 30th, 1934

INCOME

Annual Membership . $1,994.15

Tri-annual Membership . 76.50

Sustaining Membership . 20.00

English Membership . 65.37

Canadian Membership . 3.75

Check List . 14.00

Dykes . 19.50

Addisonia . 20.00

Sale of Bulletins . 92.20

English Bulletins . 2.00

Advertising . 414.00

Slides . 16.00

Miscellaneous . 25.09

Membership Lists . 2.50

Bank Interests . 8.81

Income Farr Fund . 25.00

Income from Bonds . 313.51

White Endowment . 25.00

TOTAL .

EXPENSE

Stationery .

Steno and Type .

Miscellaneous (Administrative)

Bulletins .

Slides .

Medals . .

* Misc ellaneous .

$3,137.38

$621.08

180.00

425.91

1,900.31

36.00

54.50

252.94

TOTAL

$3,471.74

NET LOSS

$334.36

* Includes bill of $214.77 for taking care of 1933 subscriptions.

Richardson Wright, Treasurer.

[9]

REGIONAL REPORTS FOR 1933

M. E. Douglas, New Jersey

■ Early in 1933 an announcement by President Wister of my
appointment as Regional Vice-President was mailed to all of the
present members, and to a few former members, in the three
states.

Immediately thereafter I mailed to all of them a quasi-question¬
naire and circular letter which sought to elicit suggestions as to
how I might be of service to them and which offered various
forms of cooperation.

Aside from the desire thus to serve individual members, m3"
thought was that this offer of itself might be instrumental in
holding some present members who otherwise might drop out,
and perhaps in getting other members.

The replies indicated complete satisfaction in the three states
with the conduct of the national affairs of the Society by its offi¬
cers. Not one negative note was sounded in any reply nor in any
later conversation with any regional member. On the contrary,
I heard enthusiastic comments about the personnel of the national
management and wide appreciation of the contents of the quar¬
terly Bulletins. Incidentally, several hundred multigraphed
copies of forecasts of contents of the later 1933 issues of the
Bulletin were placed where it was hoped new members might
be attracted by them.

I am happy to report therefore that our members favor the
maintenance of the forward-looking policy and program of the
Society.

Of the several forms of service which I tendered the members
the one which seems to have been productive of the best results
in the way of publicity for the Society, was my offer, entirely
without charge, to meet in 1933, any group of 25 or more iris
lovers, anywhere in the region, for a roundtable talk.

This offer brought calls for me to talk about the iris before
groups of enthusiasts to the number of perhaps 500 people. Thus
through the kindly instrumentality of our member, Mrs. B. A.
Stewart of Newton, N. J., I enjoyed a delightful evening at New¬
ton, with the Sussex County Garden Club. Mrs. Hollingshead of
Sparta, president of the club, presided.

[10]

Later, Mrs. H. H. Clark who has long been active in the garden
work of the New Jersey Women’s Clubs arranged for a similar
Iris discussion with the Woodbury and Wenonah Clubs at the
home of Mrs. L. B. Moffett, of Woodbury.

Then our member, Mrs. Benjamin S. Mechling of Riverton,
N. J., took the initiative in making arrangements by which the
Riverton Club in a body came to my home for an Iris talk and to
see the Irises here then at the height of their bloom.

In September, at the request of Mrs. William P. Chalfant, of
Pitman, N. J., I talked before the Pitman Club at a meeting in
the Methodist Church in that city.

And the Haddonfield, N. J., Club has made arrangements to
come in a body to my home in May, 1934, for an Iris discussion
and to see my Irises as did the Riverton Club last May.

Throughout the season in 1933 the garden was at all times
open to visitors. Not counting club groups which came en bloc,
it was a common occurrence for from 50 to 100 visitors a day
to come, many of them from considerable distances. Each suc¬
ceeding year increasing numbers have come and from greater
distances, although I sell no rhizomes. Thus I know that interest
in the Iris is growing.

In late June, the increase of my Irises compelled me to dispose
of several thousand surplus rhizomes of standard varieties. An
advertisement in a local newspaper listed their names and colors.
They were offered without charge to whomsoever would come for
them. And how the people came- — in a steady stream two days
long until the surplus was joyfully removed. Some garden lovers
sent their cars and chauffeurs, many more drove their own cars
to get the rhizomes ; neighbors came on foot ; one working-woman
with a baby in her arms trudged from her home a mile and one-
half away, pulling a boy’s wagon to get hers; young and old
came, whites and blacks, Gentiles and Jews, Anglo-Saxons and
Italians.

From this experience I would say that in South Jersey the
Iris is as popular as it was in the country of M. Cayeux when
King Clovis made the golden Fleur-de-lis a part of the royal
banner of France.

If it be that any Iris collector has mental reservations against
the practical wisdom of having his garden open to visitors at all
times, let me reassure him. Notwithstanding the many who have

[l] 1

come, no visitor lias injured any of my plants and none of them
have been taken without permission.

Yes, I know how one may feel while in the garden taking Iris
notes with all too little time for it and with darkness coming on,
when one visitor after another interrupts with: “What is the
name of this one?” or “Did William R. Dykes bloom for you in
the open garden?” etc. Incidentally, my three plants of William
R. Dykes, planted in midsummer, 1932, made no bloom stalks
in 1933; but Mrs. Mechling’s single plant bore gorgeous un¬
decked great blooms in the open garden this year, winter-pro¬
tected by what she called a “cute little wooden coop.”

I also know how, at such times, one who will may feel under
the almost breathless questions of children who seem to see not
Irises, “but white and purple butterflies, tied down with silken
strings.” If Mary Fenellosa had an Iris garden, I am confident
it was open to children.

And I know too how it feels to receive from one with whom
I have no recollection of speaking, or of even seeing, a letter such
as the following which was mailed to me from a city hundreds of
miles away. The writer of it must be nameless here, and the
address and date withheld, for I am without permission to dis¬
close them. The letter :

“I spent the winter and spring in Woodbnry with my sister
while recovering from a broken back.

“It was a regular part of our program to wander about your
garden and to keep track of each individual plant.

“I want you to know that your garden played a definite part
in my recovery, for the great pleasure it gave me and for the
faith and the hope which growing things stand for.

“And not the least part of its help was the knowledge that
people will plant gardens for others to enjoy. On every hand we
heard that you liked to have strangers come to see your flowers.
I think you should know how very much I appreciated it.

“And too, you may like to know that I am making what is
considered a miraculous recovery and will eventually be as
good as new.”

This gracious letter seems to suggest that it is unusual for a
grower to enjoy having strangers come to see his Iris. Over-much
credit is thereby given me for in this I have but feebly imitated
the open sesame by which I have been made welcome in Iris time

by growers from Massachusetts to California and overseas. True,
I have heard of gardens disfigured and of growers belied in Iris
time by “Keep Out” or “No Trespassing” signs or attitudes.
But I have yet to see the former and to meet the latter in the
flesh.

Of course, this open-garden suggestion in no way applies to
circumstances or occasions which compel the closed-garden alter¬
native,— such as for example, the personal need to enforce ex¬
treme privacy of sanctuary, or full quiet, or uninterrupted at¬
tention to invited guests, and the like.

I have been told, not by commercial growers, however, that it
is not to their advantage for amateurs to give away their surplus
as I do. Yet, an inner small voice tells me that those to whom
I gave will buy in the next five years more new varieties than
they have bought in all their preceding years. Yes, certainly, to
destroy the surplus is much easier than to allot among all and
sundry that would come.

Surely most of us have profited by the accurate, colorful de¬
scriptions and the suggestions for harmonious varietal combina¬
tions for which we are indebted to Mrs. Hires. Those who know
her appreciate her kindly reticence in the face of negative ideas
and defeatist attitudes no less than her enthusiasm for optimistic
outlooks. It is not surprising to find that the varietal descrip¬
tions by such judges are valuable no less for what they leave
unsaid by way of constructive notice what more to inquire about,
than for their positive definitive statements.

But to acknowledge all of the cooperation and the courtesies
that have been extended to me would be to list the names of all
of the members who have written to me, all whom I have met,
and in particular all by whom regional articles appear in the
January issue. I can but thank them, each and every one.

Several regional members have had considerable serious trouble
this year with root-rot, — in at least one case, with the so-called
“mustard-seed rot,” causes, remedies and preventatives for which,
it is suggested, should be adequately discussed in the Bulletin.

Elsewhere President Wister lias mentioned the Iris pilgrimage
by our regional members last May to the famous Iris Bowl in
the garden on the estate of Mr. and Mrs. Horatio Gates Lloyd,
of Haverford, Pa.; to Mr. Wister ’s own garden and to Mrs. J.
Edgar Hires’ garden of novelties and rare varieties. Mr. Wister

[13]

lias described the Iris Bowl in detail. As far as I recall, however,
no one, unfortunately, has described in print Mr. AVister’s most
educational planting scheme of all, or at least of most, of the good
tall-bearded ones in sequence by colors after the manner of the
spectrum. Nor have I yet seen any adequate printed reference
to his tireless activity, unfailing courtesy, and long-suffering pa¬
tience in serving our members individually and in advancing
the interests of the Society.

J. C. Nicholls, New York

All the different kinds of Irises did well in 1933 but the season
of bloom was ten days ahead of the usual time. That forced some
desirable critics and counsellors to abandon their visits.

AVe never feel certain that our evaluation of an Iris as a one-
year plant is accurate and just, and we turned in no ratings
of such plants in 1933. Here are notes on some of those and on
a few others with which we are familiar as mature plants. The
comment on the young plants is tentative.

First ; young plants only. Alchemy was disappointing but the
plant was rather weak. Alta California was far better than
reports had led us to anticipate; tall, large enough, good shape
and substance, high but nicely branched; it was a fairly deep,
clear yellow self, though the sulphur undertone could be de¬
tected by close inspection ; fertile in both directions. Chromylla,
also on young plant, was not so impressive.

Blue Monarch and Ningal both appeared to be fine Irises but
we wish to see them again on stronger plants. Claude Aureau
was new to us and was one of the delightful surprises of the
season; it is a blend of great charm. The other darker blend,
El Tovar, seems to be up to the advance notices and we are
anxious to see it on a strong plant.

Golden Light elicited enthusiastic praise from many visitors;
so has the older Euphony— a well grown clump often has 40-inch
stalks, wonderfully branched and bearing as many as seven per¬
fect blooms open at a time. One of the best Sass originations.
Dog Rose and Gilead both were nice but we expect to be able to
say something better of them after next June. Persia is hardly
as impressive as many others of Dr. Ayres, but is quite nice.

AVA have often been embarrassed by requests to recommend a

[1^1

medium sized hardy white Iris; it is hoped that June Bride will
live up to promise of last June and help answer such requests.
Mabel Taft, a very nice one, has the largest roots and foliage we
have seen. We were able to detect no faults in Red Dominion —
fine in every way. Descriptions of Depute Nomblot had led us
to anticipate something on the order of Red Dominion or Shir-
van ; we have had the Depute in strong growth for three years
but the competition of other Irises of better color and stronger
and better branched stalks has somewhat dimmed its reputation ;
however, its perfection of form and finish will make it go.

We scrutinize every Iris for potentialities as a parent; Spokan
and its sisters, J. Sass Numbers 30-20 and 30-40, impressed us
greatly in this connection. Spokan has worth as is but it would
seem to be a fine lead towards redder Irises. Number 30-40 has
even better color but its standards are weak.

Really clear white Irises of height and size are scarce and Venus
de Milo appears to be a fine one. It is free from the blue under¬
tone so common to most of this kind.

We will now mention some of the older Irises. Mary Geddes
adds a new and beautiful effect in the garden and we expect its
reputation to grow rather than diminish. Clara Noyes is subject
to exactly the same comment, its color effect being a little different.

Coronation and Pluie d’Or are both splendid medium sized yel¬
low Irises sufficiently different to avoid conflict. Pluie d’Or is
probably a 24 chromosome kind with the size limitations in accord.
Coronation is a triploid with 36 chromosomes, unexpectedly fer¬
tile in both directions, and offers some probability of larger yel¬
low offspring.

Louisiana Irises. For four years now, all the wild Irises col¬
lected in Louisiana have thriven and bloomed without any winter
protection. They appear to do equally well on sharp, well drained
side-hill or on low and level ground. The only special treatment
we give them is to work three inches of shredded peat-moss into
the soil. They make rapid lateral growth and this must be con¬
sidered. Also, lacking the unlimited soil fertility of their native
habitat, they exhaust a site in about three years and begin to
“peter out.” Both the spreading and the weakening can be ob¬
viated by transplanting every two or, at most, three years. Their
foliage attempts to persist through the winter and that leads to
an occasional shoot rotting in spring.

[15]

They are expected to find a. place in our gardens. Their color
range is even wider than that of the bearded Iris: yellow, white,
pinkish, deepest blue purple, pale purple, slaty gray, indigo,
blends of many kinds and rather close approaches to blue and
red. No plicatas. Two crimson ones have bloomed at odd times
throughout the summer, once as late as October 15. Chromosome
determinations indicate that they will probably all cross in their
owm group but not with shrevei nor versicolor. Neither should
shrevei cross with versicolor but that can be definitely confirmed
by trial only.

Shrevei , Carolina and the Indiana virginica all appear to be one
and the same species. They are perfectly hardy and can probably
fight their way in the open meadows of this harsh climate. Their
luxuriant forty-inch foliage is the most ornamental of any Iris.
The young shoots of several of them are beautifully colored in
spring, metallic violets and purples. Among those collected in
Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina are clear whites,
bright rose, pale lilac, darker lilac and white, flushed blue. Most
of them are small but one or two are fairly large. Some of these
will take their places in our gardens without question.

Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs, Texas

How one thrills with pride and satisfaction on discovering a
plant or group of plants that prove a perennial joy — dependable
things whose pageant of bloom make the garden a riot of beauty!
Season after season they come to us, and assurance becomes
doubly sure that this is a plant entirely adaptable to all local
climatic conditions, when the Weather Man capriciously produces
every extreme variation of temperature, and that plant whose vir¬
tues we had so lavishly praised becomes but a crushing disap¬
pointment.

So runs the history of Iris in the Southwest!

After boasting for seasons that the one ideal plant had been
discovered — two springs ago a severe cold spell in the fall caused
a disappointing season of bloom, followed the next year by an un¬
precedented cold in late January (that had been preceded by days
of spring-time, balmy temperature) which ruthlessly cut to the
ground shrubs and plants alike. The early-blooming varieties of

[10 1

the Iris suffered in this destruction, and few blossomed. So, two
seasons of disappointment must be reported for Iris, reckoning all
types in the complete tally.

Yet the story of the Iris season in the Southwest is not all a
gloomy one, for happily the mid-season and later varieties, whose
blossoms are possibly the most gorgeous of the year, were only
injured in a limited way; rather strange, perhaps, as shown by
the large blossoms of very short stems, and other unusual charac¬
teristics.

Taken as a whole even this queer season did not dampen the
ardor of Iris enthusiasts, for the coming season is already being
anticipated with breathless interest, augmented perhaps by a few
early spring-blooming varieties that are blooming now, at Christ¬
mas-time, out of season — for, so far, no one has reported having
any blossoms on the fall-blooming varieties.

Few Iris Shows were held last spring, as the condition of the
plants was so abnormal. The fact that the same varieties were not
affected alike at different locations makes it rather interesting to
speculate on what part the soil and cultural conditions have had
in building up resistance to sudden cold, or whether those vagaries
we have had were due entirely to location of planting and ex¬
posure.

Those persons familiar with the history of Iris breeding will
readily understand why Freda and Wm. Mohr and Santa Barbara
suffered so terribly, while Purissima was practically destroyed in
every instance. San Francisco and Manna Lou had no blossoms
at all. Los Angeles, perhaps, came nearest being normal and was
the most satisfactory of all the varieties from the Pacific Coast.

The glory of the year was centered around the old, tried varie¬
ties of the North (such as Seminole, Georgia, Quaker Lady, Slier-
win Wright, etc.) — while the best of the newer ones included Duke
of York, Jacqueline Guillot, Mrs. Marion Cran, Midgard, Nusku,
Rose Marie, Indian Chief, Dauntless and almost all of the Wil¬
liamson introductions, while Asia surpassed them all ! Coronation
with its imperfect blooms was one of the disappointments, while
Plue d’Or seemed affected not at all.

[17]

REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE
Dr. A. E. Waller, Ohio

• The American Iris Society is fortunate in having among its
members a small number of persons who either because of their
professional interest, or botanical or horticultural investigations or
because of their training and abilities and personal bent are eager
to know a great deal more about irises than can be learned by en¬
joying their bloom in the garden. There has been in name a
scientific committee consisting, however, of but one member. Our
President has been most conservative in not appointing more
members. However, he has been probably too tolerant in allowing
the Society to consider that one individual — busy with other mat¬
ters of daily routine — could really assume responsibility for the
Society in this important work. It is true there have been sev¬
eral reports published in the Bulletin under the heading of
Scientific Studies. But these are only a start. Early in 1933 the
following members agreed to serve: Mr. B. Y. Morrison, 116
Chestnut Street, Takoma Park, D. C.; Dr. E. 0. Essig, College of
Agriculture, University of California, Berkeley ; Dr. George M.
Reed, Brooklyn Botanic Garden; with Dr. A. E. Waller, Ohio
State University, as Chairman. This present set up of a com¬
mittee desires in every possible way to further the important work
of keeping records in all the fields that contribute to our knowl¬
edge of the genus Iris. It should be clear that the number of
members as well as the personnel of the committee should by ac¬
tion of the committee with the approval of the Directors of the
Iris Society be changed from time to time and that a plan for
several years of work should be projected before final reports are
to be expected. A committee engaged in research has the eventual
opportunity, if the right persons can be contacted, to report on
every type of iris that exists. Consequently the individual mem¬
bers of the Committee are alert to all items of interest that come
to their attention. In addition suggestions and advice from the
Society as a whole are wanted.

What are some of the projects that the committee visualizes? In
the first place, who is willing to step forward with a plan for ac¬
curate identification? For example are the members at large
concerned over the question of species? Do they know that the
newest edition of the Flora of the Southeastern U. S. contains a

[18]

list of some ninety odd new species of Iris? That many of these
are from a single locality and that some of them are limited to a
single type specimen? Will these species hold their identity in
the years to come? Or are they simply hybrid segregates compar¬
able to the numerous varieties in our gardens? A deadly silence
greeted the announcement of all of these new names. Are they to
remain ignored? In the same publication, Iris crist at a is appar¬
ently to be separated from the four or five oriental species to
which it is closely related and along with I. verna placed into a
new genus — not Iris. The reasons for making such a change
would not interest the members of the Society. Here is where
some concerted action would seem desirable. Varieties are named
through committee action, why not species?

Iris breeding problems lead directly to the subject of1 greatest
interest to commercial growers eager for new varieties as well as
to some fortunate amateurs who have successfully produced new
forms. Back of this is the necessary fundamental research on
heredity in Iris. There cannot be said to have been any scientific
breeding in the production of most of our garden irises. Most of
them have been obtained by mating varieties that looked good or
were available to the breeder. There have been a limited number
of species crosses. The resulting hybrids have been propagated,
but only recently have any attempts been made to follow up this
work by crossing the hybrids back to their parents or by selfing
the hybrids or making further crosses among these hybrids. The
notable success that has followed crossing of the pallida, variegata
and Eastern Mediterranean groups of tall bearded irises is worthy
of trial among other species. One member of the committee is
already at work on the foliosa-fulva crosses. But whether com¬
pleted by the committee or not, the interesting records should be
made available to all who are engaged in iris breeding.

Breeding work is more and more depending upon chromosome
studies to help unravel its problems. This is not work which the
commercial grower can undertake, though I am certain that a
knowledge of the genetics of iris would be valuable in the long
run to all iris breeders. The projects of chromosome investigation
should be regarded as a challenge to the Society as a whole if it
professes a genuine interest in how new types may be created.
In France Simonet has undertaken to count chromosomes of a
number of species.

[19]

Problems of seed germination constitute a frequent question in
my correspondence with several members. It only arises as an
important question in the introduction of new species or in the
question of producing seeds from difficult crosses. Few growers
have records of percentage of seed germination.

The responses of iris to light, to soils, to water, are all problems
that would throw a great deal of information open to the growers
of irises everywhere who want to know why in one garden a par¬
ticular iris flourishes whereas in another it languishes or it has a
very different appearance.

Growth and behavior studies in many plants furnish suggestive
materials for use in studying iris problems. In the Ohio State
University Botanic Garden, the bulbous species Iris histrioides set
seeds last year. I was informed by the Van Tubergen Nursery
of Haarlem, Holland, that it does not set seeds in their country.
Through the generosity of the Columbus Iris Society a group of
the various bulbous irises is being accumulated in the Ohio State
Botanic Garden.

From Mr. E. 0. Essig of the Committee a list of irises that
grow in California is submitted. Mr. B. Y. Morrison has prom¬
ised a similar list from his locality. Mr. Reed has a number of
Japanese irises as well as hybrids of the foliosa-fulva groups. In
conclusion I would like to refer the reader to a file of the Bulle¬
tin of the Iris Society for a presentation of the work of the re¬
search committee as represented by the series of science studies.

Gaiser, L. 0. 1926 — Chromosome numbers in Angisoperms. I.
Genetica 8 : 401-84.

- - — . 1930. Chromosome numbers in Angiosperms. II.

Bibliographia Genetica VI. 171-466.

- ■. 1931. Chromosome numbers in Angisoperms. III.

Genetica 12: 161-260.

Tischler, G. Pflanzliche Chromosomen-Zahlen Sonderabdruck
aus Band I ( — Tabulae Biologicae Bd. VII). (1931.)

IRIS SPECIES GROWING IN CALIFORNIA
As Noted by E. O. Essig

■ Hermodactylus tuberosus.

Is hardy in California. If not disturbed it will remain for
years in the same spot without spreading to any extent. It blooms

at Berkeley the last of February and dies down in the summer.
It is an obscure, but attractive species.

Iris tingitana Boissier and Reuter. A fine large flowering form
which does well in California. It begins to bloom about the middle
of February and will maintain itself in the garden for several
years.

Iris xiphium Linnaeus and 7. xiphiodes Ehrhart, grow well
with special care. In the garden they run out in California in
two or three years. If new bulbs are planted every year they
can be expected to flower well.

Iris japonica Thunberg. (Peacock iris.)

This species is perfectly hardy in the San Francisco Bay region,
but requires shade and considerable water and manure. It blooms
in March and maintains itself in the garden for years.

Iris wattii Baker.

This has been observed at Redlands, Calif., in the garden of
S. S. Berry, where it seemed to be as much at home as 7. japonica.

Iris cristata Solander.

I have been growing plants of this species in my garden at
Berkeley for 10 years, but so far have not seen a single flower.
Perhaps it is not properly located as to shade and moisture.

Iris dichotoma Pallas.

Plants received from the Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S.
Department of Agriculture, bloomed for two successive years and
died. By rearing seedlings every year it can be maintained with
ease, but because of the ephemeral flowers it is of little interest
and value, except as a novelty.

Iris sibirica Linnaeus.

Perfectly hardy and fine in California and may be raised in
water or on fairly dry land. They do very well planted about
lawns where they secure plenty of moisture.

Iris graminea Linnaeus.

I have seen this growing nicely in the gardens of E. 0. James,
Oakland, California. It is a beautiful little species.

Iris aurea Lindley, 7. ochroleuca Linn., 7. monnieri de Caud.,
and 7. spuria Linn.

All grow to perfection in California. As a matter of fact they
are so tall and vigorous as to be undesirable in many gardens.
Many hybrids have been obtained from crossing them.

[21]

California Irises :

Iris longipetala Herbert.

Iris douglasiana Nutt.

Iris macrosiphon Torr.

All grow well in damp places, either in shade or in full sun in
the lowlands and Coast range mountains, particularly in central
and northern California. They are commonly cultivated.

Iris missouriensis Nutt.

Iris hartwegii Baker.

Are to be found in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, but I have
never seen either in cultivation, although they would probably
succeed well in many parts of California.

Iris tenax Douglas is native to Oregon and Washington, but is
commonly seen in cultivation in the San Francisco Bay Region of
California. It is one of the finest of the native western species.

Iris fulva Ker-Gawler is hardy in most parts of California and
I am growing it in the water and on dry land, but it is always
small. Some hybrids are much more satisfactory.

Iris hexagona Walter is a rampant grower in shade and sun if
given sufficient water. Its requirements appear to be about the
same as for Japanese irises.

Japanese Irises:

Iris kaempfcri and 7. laevigata perhaps do not do so well in
California as in the East. However, if planted in wet places they
are excellent. The flowers burn in the hot sun of the interior
valleys of California, but along the coast, when there is not too
much summer fog, they are fine.

Iris pseudacorus Linn, grows out of bounds in California. I
raised plants six feet tall in my pool and had to take them out to
prevent them choking everything else. On dry land, with fre¬
quent watering, this species is quite satisfactory, but is not much
favored.

Iris foetidissima Linnaeus is grown commercially in this region
for the seed pods, which are common in all florists’ shops in early
winter. It is undesirable in the small garden and requires hand
pollenation to get the best results in seed production.

Iris unguicularis Poiret (7. stylosa ) does exceptionally well in
many parts of California and blooms from October to March or
even later.

I 22]

Oncocyclus irises. Practically all the known species have been
grown in California. None of them can be said to be thoroughly
satisfactory although for a season or two they may do fairly
well. Iris susiana Linn, is not uncommon. They do better in
the southern part of the state.

Regelia irises are a little more satisfactory than the Oncocyclus ,
but are far from hardy. Iris lioogiana Dykes is perhaps the best
one in the San Francisco Bay Region, but 7. korolkowi Regel and
7. stolonif era Max. are fair. Their hybrids with pogonirises do
very well in California. They are much better in the southern
part of the state.

Pogonirises :

The following species are commonly grown and do very wyell in
California :

Iris pumila Linn.

Iris pallida Lamarck.

Iris albicans Lange.

Iris kashmiriana Baker.

Iris trojana Kerner.

Iris germanica Linn, and 7. kochi Kerner.

Iris cypriana Baker and Foster.

Iris mesopotamica Dykes.

Iris variegata Linn, is not as hardy as the others named.

[23]

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON DISPLAY GARDENS
The Plainfield Garden Club Iris Garden, Nov. 8th, 1933

■ In several ways our work during this year, and therefore our
report for this year, resembles that of last year. It has been
another year of designing and digging new beds, acquiring plants
in quantity, receiving most generous gifts, and having most re¬
markable cooperation.

Early in the spring we greatly enlarged two and added two
more large beds for Japanese varieties, down by the playground
and the Southwest corner by the rustic bridge ; more than
doubled the size of the bed of species ; and added one huge one
for the Pogocyclus, up on the plateau among the tall-bearded
varieties. For the summer, we designed and prepared another
large bed (on top of the plateau) for yellow tall-bearded varieties;
and one on the Northwest corner, by the rustic bridge, for early
and fall-blooming varieties — a most excellent place, especially for
the latter — as we wanted to have some of those in a location both
advantageous to that type and easily enjoyed by us. Late this
fall — last week, in fact — we added another very graceful bed to
the section of iris species.

In those beds prepared early in the spring we placed 43 named
and 185 unnamed (228 plants) varieties of Japanese Iris, 9 (96
plants) of species, and 11 varieties (89 plants) of Pogocyclus Iris
— a total of 423 plants, all of which (except 15 which we bought,
at a bargain, from Mrs. Cleveland) came through Dr. Reed from
the Brooklyn Botanic Garden.

In July and August we added 30 more Japanese Iris — 20 of
them very valuable ones — and 7 more varieties (122 plants) of
Pogocyclus, all of which were generous gifts from Dr. Reed. We
more than filled the beds prepared for all kinds of the Bearded
Iris — Tall-bearded, Intermediate, Dwarf, and Fall-blooming — with
112 varieties (271 plants), added 3 Species (3 plants), and 2
Siberian (2 plants). A few of these (5 varieties — 25 plants)
came from the Chairman’s garden (as did 25 to 50 more for re-

[24]

placements and to increase stock of certain varieties), a $5 pur¬
chase produced a $25 value from a commercial grower (Mr. Sass),
and all the rest, an exceptionally valuable lot, came through Mrs.
Peckham from the New York Botanical Garden (Bronx).

Our late fall acquisitions were a handsome Japanese plant
from Mrs. Atterbury, and, last week, 9 more (56 plants) Iris
Species from Dr. Reed — which just fill the new bed.

One of the most interesting and most unusual features of our
Iris Garden is the development of the section of Species of which
we now have a total of 23 (247 plants), nearly all of them native.
As we had only one last year, this line might well be called one
of the new ventures of this year. There are two others ; the Pogo-
cyclus is one of them. This type, a cross between the regular
bearded and the more exotic ones, is more exacting in its care,
but well pays for it with its exquisite, though not spectacular,
flowers. Having had excellent samples even this first year, we ex¬
pect our 18 varieties (215 plants) to give us a feast next year.
The other is the Fall-blooming (bearded) of which there have
been a few developed through hybridization among the Tall, the
Intermediate, and the Dwarf-bearded varieties. These are our
newest venture and we have acquired 19 varieties (21 plants).
Two are in bloom now — Autumn King and October Frost. (Some
other names are charming also — Golden Harvest, September
Skies.) Next fall we should have a sizeable group of bloom stalks.

In two ways this year’s report does not resemble last year’s.
We have had to study the blooms to be sure they were correctly
labelled and correctly placed. Most of the plants — being so small
and so newly set — did not bloom ; but of those which did, although
far the greater part were correct in name and location, some were
incorrectly labelled, and many had to be moved. The other dif¬
ference is the beginning of distribution. We have had to give
away 80 plants (parts of 7 varieties), duplicates, of' course, be¬
cause we had too many of those kinds. They went to our other
civic plantings (through Mrs. Devlin) and to the Park Commis¬
sion for use in other parts of the system. (Plants given to us by
the American Iris Society through botanical gardens, and those
given by commercial growers cannot be sold.) Chairman has com¬
plete record of every variety.

[25 1

As annual reports seem always to call for figures, this year’s
totals and the complete totals of both years follow :

Types Named

1933

Unnamed Varieties

Totals Totals Both Years

Plants Varieties Plants

Japanese ____ 64

210 = 274

274

470

537

Siberian _ 2

___ = 2

159

Orientalis ____

Species _ 21

______ == 21

155

247

Crested _ ____

—

Pogocyclus 18

______ = 18

215

Bearded 112

_____ = 112

271

353

3,172

Totals _

_ 427

967

895

4,361

Given away _

4,281

Bearded Types:

Named

Varieties

Plants

Tall _

_ 48

147

Intermediate _

_ 35

Dwarf _

_ 9

Fall-blooming _

_ 19

(As above) __

112

271

Definitely Named

Unnamed Varieties

Plants

1932 298

170 = 468

3,394

1933 .... 217

210 = 427

967

*515

380 = 895

4,361 —

- 80 =

4,281*

Annual Reports

also always seem to call for

a forward look,

so that also follows

: Both last year

and this we

omitted the mak-

ing of a bed which

was not needed

, and so next

spring

the Park

Commission intends to make that and to extend

two others (now

badly needed) — all as specified in the original plan. In addition
to the comparatively small matter of filling these new vacancies,
the committee will have two lines of work. The first — more im¬
portant than enjoyable — will be the continual warfare (preventa¬
tive and curative) on the Iris Borer, and the almost as continual
checking up of the correct labellings of the five hundred varieties,

[2G]

identifying them as they bloom, and keeping them or putting them
in the right color beds. The second — and more interesting — will
be the effort to continue to secure more and more of the newer
and better varieties. The day of acquisition of quantity is now
over and the time has come when the number of plants of the
commonplace varieties (which were set closely for immediate color
effect) must give a large part of their space to those which are
newer and more choice. Any one can easily choose Bearded Iris
— the catalogs are so numerous and so full — but it is not so easy
to get at the best of the Japanese and the Siberian, and it is truly
difficult to decide about varieties of Crested, Pogocyclus, Species,
Spurias, et. al. This feature of the work — the maintaining of a
high standard of quality among all types — calls for constant study,
both intensive and extensive, and it is absolutely necessary if the
G-arden is to fulfill its two-fold purpose of beauty and education.

Before closing, we must again record remarkable cooperation.
Mrs. Conner and Mrs. Dudley Barrows have again given their aid
with cordial promptness — but it has not been necessary this year
to ask for much from individual members. The Club’s various
expressions of appreciation have been a form of cooperation which
was most heartening. The understanding, constructive coopera¬
tion of Mrs. Beckham and Dr. Reed have been invaluable for, in
addition to everything else, they “said it with flowers (plants)”.
Again, as last year, the cooperation of the Park Commission from
highest official to least workman, has been almost beyond belief.
Everything asked for has been done or supplied, willingly and
immediately, and more offered. It would be impossible to list it
all, but one thing — the crown of the year’s work — must be men¬
tioned. A water pipe is to be laid from the field house to the
west side of the open ditch, so that the beds of Japanese and of
Species may be flooded at the correct times. This is the climax
of the year’s cooperation, and of our year’s work.

Harriette R. Halloway, Chairman.

[27 1

REPORT OF IRIS SHOWS HELD IN 1933
Mrs. W. L. Karcher, III., Chairman

BALA-CYNWYD, PENNA.

We had the pleasure of cooperation and extending a wee bit
of help to the Bala-Cynwyd Garden Club on their Iris Show of
June 7th.

A membership in the A. I. S. was won by Mrs. M. A. Laverty,
of Merion, Penna.

BOSTON, MASS.

The New England show of the A. I. S. was held in Boston,
June 7-8, and proved to be one of the most interesting exhibitions
ever held there. The Silver Medal of the A. I. S. offered to the
winner of the highest number of points in the single classes was
won by T. P. Donahue of Newton Lower Falls, Mass., and the
Bronze Medal for the winner of second place was awarded to
Wm. J. McKee, of Worcester, Mass.

CHULA VISTA, CALIF.

The first Iris Show of the season was held in Chula Vista, April
16-17. The show dates hit a majority of the gardens wrong, as
many fine collections were not at, their best blooming period; how¬
ever, the quality of the flowers shown was excellent, and quoting
the Judge, Mrs. Lena M. Lothrop, “the length of stem and size
of bloom was unusual for Southern California. ’ ’

It is interesting to note that many of the finest stalks exhibited
were from plants set last July.

The Bronze Medal of the A. I. S. was awarded Mr. John A.
Monroe, of Chula Vista, as winner of the greatest number of
points in all Iris classes.

The A. I. S. membership offered in Group 3 was awarded to
Mrs. Mary D. Myer, of Chula Vista.

[28]

COLUMBUS, OHIO

The Columbus Iris Society held their tenth annual Iris Show,
May 27-28, in the Archaeological and Historical Museum on the
campus of the Ohio State University with Dr. J. H. Arbuckle as
manager.

Due to weather conditions the quantity of iris was not so large,
but about. 55 exhibitors contributed irises with other perennials
which made a splendid showing.

Mrs. E. A. Peckham and Dr. Waller were the Judges.

One feature of the show which was much enjoyed, was an illus¬
trated lecture on varieties of beardless irises given by Dr. A. E.
Waller in the Auditorium adjoining the show rooms.

The Silver Medal offered by the A. I. S. was won by Mrs. E. H.
Bretschneider, the Bronze for second place by Mrs. J. II. Arbuckle.

DULUTH, MINN.

Duluth Peony and Iris Society held a very good Iris Show.
From the report of the chairman, Mrs. Schlaman, “it was a de¬
cided success in spite of a most erratic season. We had an abun¬
dance of good bloom, and many interested visitors who were very
enthusiastic in their praise of our efforts.”

The Bronze Medal of the A. I. S. was awarded to Mrs. J. B.
Finch. The A. I. S. membership to Mrs. Carl Christensen.

FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA

The Fargo Garden Society presented their first Iris Show in
cooperation with the A. I. S., June 6-7.

Although they have been sponsoring Iris Shows for several
years the A. I. S. has never had the pleasure of working with
them before.

Judging from the number of activities listed on their yearly
program, such as an Iris Show, Peony Show, Fall Garden Show,
Yard and Garden contest and a Christmas Lighting contest, I am
convinced that this is a Garden Club well worth knowing and I
am hoping to have the pleasure of attending their next show.
The Bronze Medal of the A. I. S. was won by W. H. Magill, South
Fargo, North Dakota.

[29]

FREEPORT, ILL.

The Freeport Garden Club held their annual Iris Show in con¬
junction with the annual meeting of the American Iris Society,
June 3-4.

The attendance was very good — 19 states being well represented.
Having experienced every brand of cussed weather capped off
with three of the hottest, dryest days on record previous to the
opening of the show, many fine things were past their best bloom.

The Silver Medal for sweepstakes in the amateur classes was
won by 0. E. Heard, Jr. Honors for best specimen in this class
went to a beautiful stalk of San Francisco, exhibited by Mr.
Heard. The Bronze Medal, sweepstakes in the commercial class,
was awarded to Mr. C. A. Sherman for a very outstanding exhibit ;
best specimen in this class proved to be a fine stalk of Baldwin
exhibited by C. A. Sherman.

Mrs. Douglas Pattison’s non-competitive exhibit was the recip¬
ient of much well deserved praise. Whatever success Freeport
Iris exhibitions may have attained — the many fine collections that
are owned by residents of this community are all easily traced back
to the discriminating influence of this connoisseur of fine irises.

LINCOLN, NEBR.

The Lincoln Iris Show held May 27-28, was a very fine display
of good material, very well shown with 139 exhibitors and 350 en¬
tries in the Iris classes. The entire exhibition showed a marked
improvement over all previous shows.

The Silver Medal of the A. I. S. was won by Mrs. C. C. Wig-
gans, the Bronze Medal for second place by Miss Marjorie Bern¬
stein and the A. I. S. membership was awarded to Mrs. W. F.
Day. All the winners of honors were from Lincoln.

NEW HAVEN, CONN.

The New Haven Garden Club staged a very successful Iris
Show on June 7th.

Miss Theodora Van Name, whose exhibits were exceptionally fine,
was winner of the Silver Medal of the A. I. S.

[30]

Much enthusiasm was shown by the exhibitors, who are already
making* plans to surpass all previous efforts next year.

NIAGARA FALLS, N. Y.

Niagara Falls Garden Club sponsored their first Iris Show on
June 3-4 under the direction of Frederick L. Koethen, with the
cooperation of the A. I. S. ; many fine non-competitive exhibits
were made by residents of the district of Niagara Falls, adding
greatly to the good display made by the members of the club.

Their first effort proving so successful we shall look forward
eagerly to Niagara Falls’ second annual Iris Show.

The Bronze Medal offered by the A. I. S. was awarded to Miss
H. May Brown.

ST. JOSEPH, MO.

St. Joseph staged their second annual Iris Show, May 20-21,
with a good increase in all entries, and many fine specimen Irises.
Majestic, with si xopen flowers and seven buds, was given the
award for the best specimen in the show.

Sweepstakes Silver Medal of the A. I. S. was won by Chas. F.
Wilburn of Saint Joseph. The Bronze Medal for second place
was awarded to Mrs. W. Y. Thomas of Leavenworth, Kans., and
the A. I. S. membership offered in Group 3 went to Mrs. Frank
Davis of Saint Joseph.

SAN BERNARDINO, CALIF.

This year the Iris Show was sponsored by the San Bernardino
Horticulture Society, and was held in the green room of the
California Hotel.

The exhibits were very good and the quality up to the usual
high standard.

The Bronze Medal of the A. I. S., offered as sweepstakes, was
won by Dr. F. F. Williams, and the A. I. S. membership by Mrs.
H. E. Stewart. Both are residents of San Bernardino.

[31]

SAN DIEGO, CALIF.

San Diego Iris Show was held April 22nd with the usual fine
exhibits of Iris. Many of the finest things shown were not in
competition. The Bronze Medal of the A. I. S., given for sweep-
stakes, was won by Mrs. E. W. Meise of Encanto, and the A. I. S.
membership was awarded to Mr. B. D. Miller, of Chula Vista.

Much credit is due Mrs. U. V. Tuttle for the success of this
Show, and for her untiring efforts in promoting and fostering a
love for Irises in her community.

SIOUX CITY, IOWA

The Garden Club of Sioux City staged one of the finest shows
of the 1933 list on May 31st-June 1st under the able direction of
Mrs. Ralph E. Ricker, assisted by Mr. W. S. Snyder, general
chairman of Sioux City Flower Shows.

For eight years they have been putting on annual exhibitions
and it is most gratifying to find an organization that are so en¬
thusiastic and so united in their efforts.

The winner of the Silver Medal of the A. I. S. in the amateur
classes was Mr. B. N. Stephenson; Mrs. E. C. Currier won honors
in the amateur class for the best specimen iris in the show, with
a beautiful stalk of Los Angeles. The A. I. S. membership was
awarded to W. II. Radschlag.

In the commercial classes W. S. Snyder was the sweepstakes
winner, and was awarded the Bronze Medal of the A. I. S., as
well as first place for the best specimen in the commercial class,
with a glorified stalk of San Francisco.

WASHINGTON, D. C.

The National Capital Dahlia and Iris Society held their Iris
Show May 24-25.

Individual entries ranged from one specimen to displays of
more than six hundred named varieties. Garden Clubs from the
District, Maryland, and Virginia put on some very attractive
exhibits in competition.

Howard R. Watkins, of Somerset, Mel., was awarded the Silver
Medal of the A. I. S. As winner of the most points in the Iris

[32 3

Classes, AV. T. Simmons, received the Bronze Medal awarded for
second place.

Recommendation for honorable mention was given to a seedling-
shown by AY. T. Simmons.

The Judges made special mention of a very outstanding non¬
competitive educational exhibit presented by Dr. E. A. Sheets,
which consisted of more than 600 varieties of irises, including
many new varieties from European and American hybridizers
never before exhibited at a AYashington flower show.

THE NEW CLASSIFICATION FOR BEARDED IRIS

• The dwarf, intermediate and tall bearded types are now
classified according to height instead of season of bloom to fix
the type, but the season for each type is to be noted by the
addition of the letters EE, E, EM, M, ME, F and FF, for extra
early, early, early to midseason, midseason, midseason to late,
late and very late to fall blooming. This will enable the dwarf
bearded section to take in all former so-called intermediates and
tall bearded varieties of a height under eighteen inches, and the
intermediates all former tall bearded of a height between eighteen
and twenty-nine inches, reserving for the tall bearded section
only those attaining a height of twenty-nine inches or more — -
this section will then include some of the newer intermediates by
season, which attain a height of similar proportions.

BREEDERS IN FUTURE WHEN SUBMITTING VARIETIES FOR
REGISTRATION WILL THEREFOR INDICATE THE EXACT HEIGHT,
THE BLOOMING SEASON AND DESCRIBE THE FRAGRANCE OF
THE BLOOMS.

AVHEN SUBAIITTING PARENTAGE DATA, please give the
pod-parent first. IF pod-parent is an unnamed plant indicate this
by a blank. Pollen-parent is always last.

A full list of fragrance descriptions classified in groups ac¬
cording to strength, quality, etc., is in preparation and will be
published before long.

[33]

REGISTRATIONS FOR 1933

No person other than the originator may register a seedling
unless permission in writing from the breeder to make such
registration has been granted and said letter filed with the
Chairman of the Registration Committee at the time such regis¬
tration is requested.

The closing date for registrations to be received for publica¬
tion in the January Bulletin or Special Bulletin following, is
August 1. Any received after that date will be treated as regis¬
trations of the following year.

UNDER NO CONSIDERATION WILL NAMES ALONE BE AP¬
PROVED OR REGISTERED. THESE MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY
DETAIL DESCRIPTIONS AS TO TYPE, COLOR, SEASON OF BLOOM,
FRAGRANCE AND ITS QUALITY, AND PARENTAGE IF AVAIL¬
ABLE. REGISTRANTS WILL PROVE HELPFUL TO THE SOCIETY
AND ITS REGISTRAR BY SUPPLYING THE NECESSARY DATA IN
FULL AT FIRST WRITING, AND TO SUBMIT ALTERNATIVE
NAMES IN CASE THE PREFERRED ONE IS NOT AVAILABLE.

IT is also to be UNDERSTOOD that registration or approval
of a variety is made subject to the contingency of an older
variety of the same or closely similar name coming to light soon
after the current registration or approval, in which case a new
approvable name must be submitted, when requested.

The new species of Dr. Small and Mr. Alexander are all na¬
tives of Louisiana and represent many pronounced differences.
The group names are new, tentative ones, given to make a work¬
ing basis, and may be changed.

ADDITIONS TO LIST OF BREEDERS AND INTRODUCERS

Baker — S. H. — S. Houston Baker 3rd, Denman Rd., Cranford, N. J.

Barker — M. R. — Mrs. Mabel R. Barker, Motor Route C, Dallas, Texas.
Borsch — Win. Borsch & Son, Maplewood, Ore.

Calioon — Wm. F. Gaboon, 1130 lltli Ave., S., Birmingham, Ala.

Creamer— Mrs. Lily M. Creamer, 25 Seaton PI. N. E., Washington, D. C.
Dennett — Mr. Dennett, Hillside Gardens, Estes St., Amesbury, Mass.

Elder. — J. G. Eldering & Co., Overveen, Haarlem, Holland.

Friend — Grace L. (Mrs. John W.) Friend, Petersburg, Va.

Graham — G. H. Graham, 4410 Judson, Lincoln, Nebr.

Graham — S. — Sam L. Graham, Rome, Floyd Co., Ga.

Handle. — Robert H. Handleman, White Plains, N. Y.

[34]

Jen. — Mrs. Marjorie S. Jennings, 397 Longmeadow St., Longmeadow, Mass.
Kingsley — W. H. Kingsley, Eden Glad Gardens, Hayward, Calif.

Long — J. D. — J. D. Long, Boulder, Colo.

McDade — Clint McDade, Chattanooga, Tenn.

National — National Iris Gardens (formerly H. E. Weed), Beaverton, Ore.
Nies — Eric E. Nies, 1423 N. Kingsley Drive., Los Angeles, Calif.

Pearce — Rex D. Pearce, Merchantville, N. J.

Pitysm. — Pitysmont Nurseries (Miss Cicely C. Browne), Box 5275, Raleigh,

N. C.

Reibold — F. E. Reibold, 1395 Linda Vista Ave., Pasadena, Calif.

Rhein. — John C. Rheinhardt, 2006 Fifth Ave., Evansville, Ind.

Smi. — James Smith, 215 Elm Ave., Rahway, N. J.

Smi. — W. J. — Win. J. Smith, 739 Church St., Millersburg, Pa.

Snow — Euclid Snow, R. F. D. No.

ABELARD. IB-E-S6 (Sass-H.P.
N.) ; (Eldorado colored pumila
x . ).

AIBONITA. Sib-EM-B7L (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue King).
ALEMENE. Sib-EM-B7M (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue; x Blue King).
ALKINAH. TB-M-B1M (Creamer
1933); (Shekinah x Alcazar).
AMIGO. TB-M-B9D (Wmsn. N.) ;
slightly □.

ANNIE CADIE. TB-F-Y4M (Wash.;

Nes. N.) ; slightly □.

ARIETTA. TB-M-R9M (Gers. N.) ;
(Saraband x Seminole) ; slight¬
ly □ •

ARZILLO. TB-M-R9L (Gers. N.) ;

(Saraband x Seminole).

AT DAWNING. TB-M-S7L (Kirk.

N.) ; (from two red seedlings) ; □.
ATTYE EUGENIA. TB-M-Y4L
(Snow N.) ; □.

AUGUST FLAME. Fulv-FF-R7M
(Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; Nic.-Jr. 1933.
AUTUMN DAWN. IB-EE-FF-S7M
(Nies N.) ; (Delicatissima x

. ) x (Sweet Lavender x

Mary Gibson) ; intensely
AUTUMN FIRE. Fulv-FF-R7M
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.
AVONDALE. TB-M-R7D (Sass-H.
P. N.) ; ( . x Rameses).

, Hinsdale, Ill.

AZURE DARKNESS. Sib-EM-B9D
rev. (Gers. N.) ; (Perry Blue x
Blue King).

BALBANCHA. Fulv-Hex-B7M
(Wash. N.).

BALROUDOUR. DMB-E-S3L rev.
(Sass-J. 1933); Sass-J. 1933; Sass-
H.P. 1933; (yellow seedling of

( pumila x . ) x (regelia-cyclus

var. Beatrix).

BARBARIAN. TB-M-B7D (Wmsn.

N.) ; flower almost laciniated; □.
BAREENA. Sib-M-B9D rev. (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue; x Blue King).
BARIRA. TB-S3M (Cay. N.) ; C.

M. , S. N. H. F., 1933; Rev. Hort.
105: 413, 16 June 1933.

BAYOU BARATARIA. Hex-radicris-
tatae-MF-BlL (Nic.-Jr. 1932) ;
Giganticoerulea var. China Blue.
BAYOU SAVAGE. ITex-MF-B7M
Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.
BERTHA DOROTHEA. TB-M-S6D
(Gers. N.) ; (Chasseur x Mildred
Presby) ; □.

BETTY NESMITH. TB-M-Y4D
(Wash.; Nes. N.) ; slightly □.
BILOXI. Ilex-radicristatae-MF-W 2L
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.
BLACK BIRD. DB-E-B7D (Way.

N. ).

BLANC MIGNON. Jap-Dbl-1 (Ncs.

1933); Ncs. 1933.

BLUE CUP. Sib-MF-B7D (Gers.

N.) ; (Blue King x Perry Blue).
BLUE MARBLE. IB-M-B1M (Kirk.
N.); □.

BLUE MONARCH. TB-F-S1D
(Sass-J. N.) ; □.

BLUE TOPAZ. DMB-E-S3M (Sass-
J. 1933); Sass-J. 1933; Sass-H.
P. 1933; (regelio-cyclus var. Bea-
trix) x (yellow seedling of ( pumi -
lax . ) ) .

BLUSHING NYMPH. TB-F-R7L
(Lap. -Gers. N.) ; (Kalos x
Dream) ; very sweetly □.
BRIGHTNESS. DB-E-Y4M (Emig.

1933) ; Kenwood 1933.

BROWN BETTY. TB-EM-S6D
(White-C.G. N.) ; (Mauna Loa

x . ) ; slightly □.

BRONZE GEM. DB-EE-Y7M (Fel¬
lows N.).

BRONZE GLORY. TB-F-S9M (Sim.

N.) ; (Ambassadeur x . ).

BUNTING. TB-M-B1L (Wmsn. N.) ;

table iris; slightly □.

BURNING BRONZE. TB-MF-S7D
Ayres N.) ; (Sherbert x Cardi¬
nal) x [(Nancy Orne x Domin¬
ion) x (Loute x Mesopotamica) ] .
CALIFORNIA GOLD. TB-M-Y4D
(Mohr-Mit. 1933); Salb. 1933;
(Grace Sturtevant x cream seed¬
ling) ; □.

CALINDA. TB-M-S4L (Reibold
N.) ; (Plumed Knight x Mme.
Cheri) .

CASTALIA. TB-M-B1L (Wmsn.
1933); Long. 1933; (Oriflamme x
. ) ; very

CHAMITA. TB-M-S9L (Wmsn. N.) ;
slightly □.

CHARLES HARDEE. Laev-MF-BID
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.
CHEF MENTEUR, Vinic-MF-B7D
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.

CHIPMUNK. TB-M-Y8D (Richer

N.) ; □.

CLABELYN. IB-M-R9M (Friend
N.) ; slightly

COOL WATERS. TB-EM-B1L
(Wash.; Nes. N.) ; □.

CORTEZ. TB-FF-Y9M (Nes. N.) ;
(Reverie x yellow seedling) ;

CYRUS THE GREAT. TB-E-B7D

(Kirk. N.) ; ( . x Andrew

Jackson).

DARK DAWN. Sib-EM-BID (Gers.
N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue King).

DARK MORASS. Ilex-Fulv-MF-SID
Nies N.) ; (Hex agon a Purpurea,
Dean, x fulva ) x (Hexagona Pur¬
purea, Dean, x fulva) through
three generations.

DAWNAYA. TB-M-S7M (Creamer
1933); Creamer 1933; (Dawn x
Navajo) ; slightly □.

DAWNING DAY. TB-EM-S7L
(Wash.; Nes. N.) ; □.

DEKAY. TB-F-R7L (Lap.-Gers.
N.) ; (Kalos x Wild Rose,).

DELLA ROBBIA. Jap-Dbl-3 (Nes.
1933) ; Nes. 1933.

DORCAS HUTCHESON. IB-M-FF-
B7M (McDade N.) ; (Amas x pu-
mila hybrid) ; delightfully □.

DRESDEN BLUE. Jap-Sgl-6 (Nes.
1933) ; Nes. 1933.

EARLY BIRD. Sib-EE-B3L (Gers.
N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue King).

EASTERN STAR. TB-E-W4L (Ber¬
ry N.) ; (Argentina x Colonial).

ECHO. TB-M-R9L (Gers. N.) ; (Sa¬
raband x Seminole) ; sweetly □.

ECLAT. TB-MF-S4M (Gage N.) ;
(Mary Gibson x yellow seedling) ;
□ .

ELEANOR BLUE. TB M-B1L
(Salb. 1933); Salb. 1933; (large
blue seedling x Cardinal) ; agree¬
ably □ .

ELEANOR ROOSEVELT. IB-M-
FF-R1I) (McDade N.) ; (Amas x
piwiila hybrid) ; slightly Q.

[36]

ELIZABETH ANN. TB-M-S7L
(Lap. N.) ; (Midgard x Aphro¬
dite) ; pleasingly □.
ENAMORADA. TB-M-R9L (Gers.

N.) ; (Saraband x Seminole).
EQUIPOISE. TB-M-Y9L (Wmsn.
N.) ; slightly □.

ERLKING. TB-FF-B7D (Kirk. N.) ;
unusually □.

ESPLANADE. Fulv-MF-R8M (Nic.-
Jr. 1933) ; Nic.-Jr. 1933.
FERVIENTE. Jap-Sgl-6M (Gers.
N).

FLORENCE ZACHARIE. Hex-radi-
cristatae-MF-BlM (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ;
Nic.-Jr. 1933.

FLUFFY RUFFLES. TB-M-W7L
(Gers. N.) ; (Cecil Minturn x
Caroline E. Stringer; locust blos¬
som □ .

FLYING CLOUD. Jap-Sgl-5 (Nes.
N.).

FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT. IB-M-
FF-B7D (McDade N.) ; (Cardinal
x Autumn King).

FRENIER. Laev-MF-B7L (Nic.-Jr.

1933) ; Nic.-Jr. 1933).

FROST QUEEN. IB-M-FF-WW
Sass-H.P. ; Hill-H.M., 1933); Hill-
H.M. 1933; (Autumn King x

. ); slightly □ ; Autumn King

Junior ; King Junior-WW.
GAIIANO. Sib-E R3D rev. (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue King).
GAUCHO. TB-M-Y9D (Wmsn. N.) ;
slightly □.

GENTILLY ROAD. Hex-radicrista-
tae-MF-BlD (Nic.-Jr. 1932) ; Nic.-
Jr. 1932; Giganticoerulea var. Deep
Blue.

GENTIUS. IB-E-B1D (Sass-H.P.

N.) ; ( pumila x trojana ) ; □.
GEORGIAN BAY. Pris-MF-B7M
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.
GIGANTICAERULEA ALBA. Hex-
radicristatae-MF-WW (Nic.-Jr.
1932); Nic.-Jr. 1932; Giganticoeru¬
lea var. all>a.

GLINT 0 ’GOLD. TB-MF-Y4M
(Wash.; Nes. N.) ; □.

GOLD FLAKE. TB-W8D (Mur.
1933); Orp. 1933; (W. R. Dykes
x . ).

GOLDEN HELMET. TB-F-S9M
(Sass-J. 1933); Sass-J. 1933;
Sass-II.P. 1933; (Red Wing x
Cardinal) ; slightly □.

GOLDEN WEST. IB-E-Y4M (Sass-
J. N.) ; (yellow pumila hybrid x
tall yellow seedling).

GOLD VELLUM. IB-F-Y4L (Gage
N.) ; (Coronation x mixed pol¬
len) ; □.

GRAECA. Jap-Dbl-5 (Waterer

1932) ; Waterer 1932; Nymphe.
GRAY CLOUD. DMB-E-S2M (Sass-

J. 1933); Sass-J. 1933; Sass-11.
P. 1933; (yellow seedling of ( pu¬
mila x . )) x (regelio-cyclus

var. Beatrix).

GUINEA HEN. TB-M-B2D (Richer
N.) ; (Mme. Chereau x Tene-

BRAEl) ;

HALOKA. Fulv-Hex-R7M (Wash.

N.).

HAOLE. TB-F-W1 (Thom.-W. N.) ;

(Lord of the West x . ); □.

HIGH DELIGHT. TB-M-W3L
(Sturt. N.) ; (San Francisco x
Maun a Loa) ; □.

HOBO. DB-FF-Y9D (Wmsn. N.).
IBERVILLE. Hex-radicristatae-MF-
B1M (Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr.
1933.

ICY GLOW. DB-E-W6M (Emig.

1933) ; Kenwood 1933.

ILIA. Sib-MF-WW (Gers. N.) ;

(Perry Blue x Blue King).
I-LIKA. DB- (Hires N.) ; pending.
JAMES ZACHARIE. Vinic-MF-BID
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.

J. D. NIES. Hex-Fulv-MF-S4D
(Nies N.) ; (Hexagona Purpurea,
Dean, x fulva ) x (Hexagona Pur¬
purea, Dean, x fulva) through
three generations,

[37]

JUBA. TB-R3M (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,

S. N. H. F., 1933; Rev. Hort. 105:

413. 16 June 1933.

KEMBYO. Sib-EM-B7M (Gers. N.) ;

(Perry Blue x Blue King).
KERULA. TB-M-R7M (Gers. N.) ;

(Saraband x Seminole).

IvHALED. Sib-MF-B9D rev. (Gers.

N.) ; (Blue King x Perry Blue;).
KHARTOUM. TB-R9D (Pilk. N.) ;
(Megas x Dominion) ; Nairobi
(Pilk.), J. R. H. S. No. 1, 1933.
KIDDIE. DB-E-Y6M (Thom.-W.

N.); □.

KING JUNIOR. IB-M-FF-B3M
(Sass-H.P. ; Hill-H.M. 1933); Hill-
11. M. 1933; (Autumn King x

. ); slightly □; Autumn King

Junior.

KINGLET. TB-M-Y4D (Wmsn. N.) ;
KING PELLES. Jap- (Waterer
1932); Waterer 1932; Ulysses.
KOCHINETTE. IB-E-B7D (Kirk.

N.) ; ( Kochii x . ) ; slightly □.

LADY ELEANOR. TB-EM-S3D
(Barker-M.R. N.) ; (Alcazar x
. ); □.

LADY GAGE. TB-M-W7L (Gage
N.); □.

L ’ALLEGRO. TB-M-R9M (Gers.

N.) ; (Saraband x Seminole) ;
slightly □.

LA PENSLA. IB-E-W4L (Thom.-
W. N.) ; (Lord of June x Inge-
borg) ; □.

LAUGHING WATER. Jap-Dbl-WW
(Freeborn N.).

LAURA HUTCHESON. IB-M-FF-
B3D (Sass-Il.P.; Hill-H.M. 1933);
Hill-H.M. 1933; (Autumn King x

. ); slightly □.

LEMONIAS, DB-E-Y4D (Thom.-W.

N.) ; ( pumila x . ); □.

LE VIEUX CARRE’. Fulv-MF R7M
(Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; Nic.-Jr. 1933.

LILY CREAMER. TB-M-S7L
(Creamer 1933) ; Creamer 1933.

[38]

LITTLE SMOKY. TB-M-B1D (Es-
sig 1933); Essig 1933; (Alcazar
x Souv. de Mme. Gaudichau) x
(Uncle Remus x Dominion).
LITTLE TYKE. DB-E-R7D (Thorn.-
W. N.) ; (Bluestone; x red inter¬
mediate seedling) ; □.

LOLA CSONKA. TB-M-R9D (Gers.
N.) ; (Mme. de Sevigne x Rose
Madder) ; rich grapy □ ; (pro¬
nounced Chon’ko).

LONDON PRIDE. TB-R9L (Mur.
1933); Orp. 1933; (Aphrodite x

. ).

LOUISIANA SUNSET. Fulv-MF-
R7D (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; Nic.-Jr.
1933.

MADRIGAL. TB-W8D (Mur. 1933) ;
Orp. 1933 ; seedling containing Im-
perator and Aphrodite; C. M.
Iris Soc. (Eng.) 1933; C. Prelim.
Com., R. H. S., 1933.

MAID OF TENNESSEE. TB-MF-
B7 (Wash.; Nes. N.) ; □.
MALUSKA. TB-F-R7D (Nes. N.) ;

(Shekinah x . ) ; slightly

MANDEVILLE. Hex-radicristatae-
MF-B7L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr.
1933.

MARGOT CASTELLANOS. Fulv-
MF-R7L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr.
1933.

MARMARGE. TB-M-B1M (Creamer
1933); Creamer 1933; (William
Marshall x Margery) ; □.
MARPESSA. Jap-Dbl-5 (Waterer
1932); Waterer 1932; Siren.
MARY ALICE. TB-E-B3M (Richer
N.) ; (Crusader x Lent A. Wil¬
liamson) ; □.

MARY LEE DONAHUE. TB-MF-
Y4D (Gage N.) ; (Wm. R. Dykes
x Primrose) ; □.

MATO AKA. TB-M-S9M (Friend
N.) ; wistaria □.

MECCA. Jap-Sgl-3 (Nes. 1933) ;
Nes. 1933.

METAIRIE. Fulv-MF-B7L (Nic,-
Jr. N.).

MIAMI. TB-EM-B7D (Rhein. N.) ;

□ .

MIAMI CHIEF. TB-M-R9D (Rich¬
er N.) ; (Seminole; x mixed pol¬
len) ; □.

MIDWEST GLORY. TB-F-B3D
Thom.-W. N.) ; (Sass seedling x
mixed pollen) ; □.

MINSTRING. TB-M-B1L (Creamer
1933); Creamer 1933; slightly □.
MINTGER. TB-M-B1L (Creamer
1933) ; Creamer 1933.

MISS BLUE. TB-M-B1D (McKee
N.) ; (Sensation x mixed pollen) ;
□ .

MME. RECAMIER. TB-EM-S4L

(W a s h. ;N e s. N.) ; Loveliness

(Wash.).

MONARDA. IB-FF-R9D (Richer
N.) ; (Shekinah x Parisiana) ;

□ .

MONOMOY. TB-EM-B3D (McKee
N.) ; (blue seedling x Royal
Beauty).

MOONGLO. TB-M-Y8M (Wmsn.
N.).

MOONSPRITE Sib-W7L (Jen. N.) ;

(SUPERBA X . ).

MOUNTAIN LAKE Sib-MF-B3D
rev. (Gers. N.) ; (Blue King x
Perry Blue).

MRS. CREAMER TB-M-W7L
(Creamer 1933) ; Creamer 1933.
MT. WHITNEY Spur-W4 (Millik.
1933); So. Cal. 1933; H. M., A.

I. S., 1932 ( ochroleuca x . ).

MUGGINS DB-E-B9D (Thom.-W.

N.) (Bluestone x . ); □.

MUSKOGEE Hex-MF-R7L (Nic.-Jr.
N.).

MYSTIC MOON Sib-F-W4L (Gers.

N.) ; (Blue King x Perry Blue).
NARONDA TB-M-B1D (Hall N.) ;

(Princess Beatrice x . ) x

(VioLACEA Grandiflora) ; slight¬
ly □ .

NATIONAL PROSPERITY TB-B9D
(National 1933) ; National 1933.

NAVADAW 1B-M-S7M (Creamer
1933) ; (Dawn x Navajo) ; slight¬
ly □ .

NEMACOLIN TB-F-Y9D (Hall +

N.) ; (Jacquesiana x . ) x

(Montour) ; very slightly □.
NEVA Jap-Sgl-3 (Nes. N.).
NIOVA Sib-EM-W4. (Gers. N.) ;

(Perry Blue x Blue King).
OCTOBER BLUE IB-M-FF B1M
(Sass-H.P. ; Hill-H.M. 1933); Hill-

H. M. 1933; (Autumn King x
. ) ; delicately □.

ODERIC TB-MF-R9D (McKee N.) ;
(Mrs. Valerie West x mixed pol¬
len) ; □.

OGLETHORPE Laev-MF-BIL (Nic.-
Jr. 1933) ; Nic.-Jr. 1933.

OLD VELVET TB-M-S9D (Gers.
N.) ; (Chasseur x Mildred Pres-
by) ; honey sweet □.

OLYMPIC TB-EM-W1M (Berry
N.) ; (Bruno) x (mesopotamica x
Magnifioa) .

ONTARIO TB-S9L (Pilk. N.) ;

(Aphrodite x . ) ; J. R. II. S.

#1, 1933.

OPAL BLUE Sib-BIL (Sturt.; Nes.
1933); Nes. 1933.

OPAL DAWN TB-M-S4L (Sturt.
N.) ; sweetly □.

PALATLAS TB-E-B7L (Creamer
1933) ; (Palceng x Atlas) ; very

□ .

PEER GYNT TB-MF-W8M (Wash.;
Nes. + N.); □.

PEWEE IB-M-WW (Wmsn. N.) ;
table iris; Columbine (Wmsn.) A.

I. S. Bull., July, 1933.

PINK BUTTERFLY TB-F-S4L
(Wash.; Nes. N.).

PINK JEWEL IB-M-R7L (Salb.
1933); Salb. 1933; (Gaviota x
George Yeld) ; □.

PINK LADY IB-EM-S4L (Wash.;
Nes. N.); □.

PINK OPAL TB-FR1L (Sass-J.
N.).

[39]

PLURABELLE TB-Y9M (Cay.

1933); C. M., S. M. H. F, 1933.
POINT ALA IIACIIE Vinic-MF-
B7D (Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr.
1933.

POMONA Sib-MF-B7M (Gers. N.) ;

(Blue King x Perry Blub).
PONTCH ARTRAIN Hex - MF - B7L
(Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr., 1933.
PRELUDE TB-M-S3L (Sturt, N.) ;
sweetly □.

PURPLE GIANT TB-B1D (Gage
1933) ; Giant Purple.

PURPLUM IB - F - R3D (Creamer
1933); Creamer 1933; (Red Cloud
x . ).

RAPIER TB-M-B7M (Richer N.) ;

(Afterglow x I so line) ; □.

RED COMET TB-M-R7D (McKee
N.) ; (Dauntless x mixed pollen) ;
slightly □.

KEDGLOW TB-F-S9D (Essig 1933) ;
Essig 1933; (Modoc x Bruno);
pleasantly □.

RED KING Jap-Sgl-6 (Way. N.).
RED ORCHID IB-E-R7D (Sass-J.
N.) ; (red purple pumila hybrid x
dark red purple tall seedling).
ROSE DUBARRY Jap-Dbl-3 (Nes.
1933); Nes. 1933.

ROSE MIGNON Jap-Sgl-5 (Nes.
1933) ; Nes. 1933.

ROSY EAST TB-M-R9M (Gers. N.) ;
(Saraband x Seminole) ; grapy

□ .

ROYAL PRINCE IB-M-B9D (Gers.
N.) ; (sport of Flam men -
SCHWERt) ; pleasingly □.

RUBY GIANT Jap-Dbl-G (Way. N.).
SALUTE TB-M-S9L (Sturt. N.) ;
sweetly □.

SAM DAVIS TB-EM-R7M (Wash.;

Nes. N.) ; slightly □.

SAMUEL L. EARLE TB-EM-R7D
(Cahoon N.) ; (Apttrodite x Im-
pehator) ; slightly □.

SAN DB-E-Y4L (Hires, inf. distr.
1933) ; A. I. S. Bull., July, 1933.

SANDIA TB-M-R7M (Wmsn. N.) ;

SANDY IB F-S5M (Creamer 1933);

Creamer 1933; (Red Cloud x ....).
SARANOLE TB-M-R7M (Creamer
1933) ; Creamer 1933.

SARSEM TB-M-R9L (Creamer
1933) ; Creamer 1933.

SAZERAC Fulv-MF-R7M (Nic.-Jr.

1933); Nic.-Jr. 1933.

SEMISAR TB-M-R3L (Creamer
1933) ; Creamer 1933.

S E M B A N TB-M-B9M (Creamer
1933); Creamer 1933.
SEPTEMBER SKIES IB-M-FF-B7D
(Sass-H.P. ; Ilill-H.M. 1933); Hill-
II. M. 1933; (Autumn King x
. ); slightly □.

SILVERY SKY Sib-M-BIL (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue King).
SISTER TB-F-R3L (Sturt. N.) ;

(Jubilee x Nineyeh).

SKYBLUE WATER Sib-EM-BIM
(Gers. N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue
King).

SMIDGEN DMB-E-B7D (Berry N.) ;

(Jcorolkowi x . ).

SNOWMAID Jap-Sgl-1 (Nes. 1933) ;
Nes. 1933.

SPANISH FORT Hex-radicristatae-
MF-B8L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); Nic.-Jr.
1933.

SPOKAN TB F-S9D (Sass-J. 1933) ;
Sass-J. 1933; Sass-H.P. 1933;
(Red Wing x King Tut) ; slight¬
ly □ •

SPRINGTIME TB-M-R1L (Sturt.
N.) ; (Yellow Moon x seedling
#F5-12).

STONEWALL JACKSON TB-EM-
Y9D (Wash.; Nes. N.) ; □.
STORMY DAWN DMB-E S3L (Sass-
J. 1933); Sass-J. 1933; Sass-H.P.
1933 ; (yellow seedling of ( pu¬
mila x . )) x (regelio-cyclus

var. Beatrix).

SUNDIPT TB-M-Y4M (Wmsn. N.) ;
slightly □.

[40]

SUNDOT TB-M-B9D (McKee N.) ;
(Red Radiance x mixed pollen) ;
slightly □.

SUNOL TB-M-S4D (Mohr-Mit,
1933); Sail). 1933; (King Midas
x . ) ; □.

SUNTAN TB-F-S4D (Baker-S.H.
N.) ; (Vesper Gold x Vesper
Gold); slightly □.

SUSA IB-E-R9D (Sass-H.P. N.) ;

( pumila x Am as) ; □.

SWEET ALIBI TB-E-Y4L (White-
C.G. N.) ; (Mirasol x Puris-
sima) ; II. M., A. I. S., 1932.
SYLVIA LENT TB-M-Y5L (Shull
1933); Shull 1933; (Sophronia x
Coppersmith) ; agreeably
SYRINX TB-M-R3D (Gers. N.) ;
table iris; (Saraband x Semi¬
nole) ; locust blossom □.
TAGAMI TB-M-R3D (Gers. N.) ;
(Saraband x Seminole) ; slight
grapy □.

TAI-O-WA ++ Sib-M-W4L (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue; King).
TALLAHASSEE Hex-MF-R7L
Nic.-Jr. N.).

TARNEVERRO TB-F-S9D (Thom.-
W. N.) ; (King Tut x a Longfield
seedling; slightly □.

THUNER SEA Sib-M-BID (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue x Blue King).
TINT 0 ’TAN TB-MF-S4L (Ayres
N.).

TLAYX Sib-M-B3L (Gers. N.) ;

(Perry Blue x Blue King).
rOLANA+Fulv-Hex R7L (Wash N )•
TOURMALINE TB-M-S7M (Berry
N.).

TRAILS END TB-M-S7M (Wmsn.;
Pat. N.).

TRANQUILITY TB-MF-B7M (Gage
N.) ; (Lady Byng x mixed pol¬
len) ; □ .

TUCCIA Sib-MF-WW (Gers. N.) ;

(Perry Blue x Blue King).
UKIAH TB-M-S9D (Essig 1933);

lerie West).

ULLSWATER Sib-MF-B3D r e v.
(Gers. N.) ; (Blue King x Perry
Blue) .

VELVO DMB-E-R3M (Sass-J. 1933) ;
Sass-J. 1933; Sass-H.P. 1933;
(regelio-cyclus var. Beatrix) x
(yellow seedling of ( pumila x ....)),
VESPER HOUR TB-E-S1L (Wash.;
Nes. N.).

VIXEN DB-E-B7D (Thom.-W. N.) ;

( pumila x Sass pumila seedling) ;

□ .

WAHALLE Fulv-Hex-S4L (Wash.
N.).

WAIKIKI IB-E-B7D (Thom.-W.
N.) ; (Seminole x intermediate
seedling) ; □.

WAR EAGLE TB-F-R9D (Sass-J.
N.) ; slightly

WENATCHEE TB-F-S9D (Thom.-
W. N.) ; (King Tut x a Longfield
seedling).

WESTLANDER TB-M-B3D (Essig
1933); Essig 1933; (California
Blue x Louis Bel) x (Unclei Re¬
mus x Moa).

WHITE MARBLE TB - M - WW
(Wass. N.).

WHITE SPRAY- Sib-F-WW (Gers.

N.) ; (Perry Blue; x Blue King).
WILBICO TB-M-B9D (Creamer
1933) ; Creamer 1933.

WINNER TB-M-R1D (Sturt. N.) ;

(Felicity x Cameliard seedling).
WINTER SKIES Jap-Sgl-7 (Nes.
1933) ; Nes. 1933.

WITCH OF SALEM TB-MF-B3D
(Berry N.).

WONDERCHILD TB-B9D (National
1933); National 1933; (Daunt¬
less x Blue Velvet) ; Blue Vel¬
vet’s Wonder Child.

YANEKA Fulv-Hex-Bl (Wash. N.).
ZOUATLA TB-M-R2M (Creamer
1933); Creamer 1933; (Zouave x
Atlas) ; slightly □.

ZU ZAN TB EE-S4D (Thom.-W.
N.) ; (Rembrandt x Midwest).

Essig 1933; (Alcazar x Souv. de
Mme. Gaudichau) x (Mrs. Va-

[41]

VARIETIES APPROVED IN 1933, BUT NOT REGISTERED

This list contains certain varieties which have been approved for regis¬
tration, but because the data has been slow coming in, the names have been
included here and marked pending, and when registration becomes complete
on these, it will be unnecessary to publish them again, except when even¬
tually introduced. Such action serves the added purpose of advising breed¬
ers that these names are no longer available. THIS FEATURE HAS AL¬
READY RESULTED IN ABUSES, and will be discontinued. In future no
approvals will be made on request from breeders unless accompanied by detail
description (see rules given before list of registrations).

ADULATION (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ALADDINS LAMP Spur-Y4D (San.-
L.W.; Cooley 1933); Cooley 1933.
ALICE HARDING TB-Y4L (Cay.
1933) ; Dykes Medal and Harding
Prize, S. N. II. F. 1933; Gard.
Chron. 3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June
1933; Roi Soleil.

AMENOPHIS (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ANAMITE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ANDROCEE TB-S3M (Vilm. N.) ;
C. M., S. N. II. F., 1933; Gard.
Chron. 3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June
1933.

ANN STODDER (Donahue N.) ;
pending.

ANN TEBBETTS (Snow N.) ; pend¬
ing.

ATTITASIl TB-S3L (Dennett
1933); Riverview 1933.
BADINAGE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
BAMBARA (Cay. N.) ; pending.
BANNERET TB-S (Mur. N.) ;

Gard. Ill. 54: 354. 17 June 1933.
BARIRA TB-S3M (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,
S. N. H. F., 1933; Rev. Hort. 105:
413. 16 June 1933.

BENJAMINE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
BOHeME (Cay. N.) ; pending.
BRALLIARS GIANT TB-E-R7L
(Bral. bef. 1933); Ashley 1933.
BROCELI ANDRE (Cay. N.) ; pend¬
ing.

C. G. VAN WIERINGEN Dut Y4D
(deG. N.) ; A. M. Haarlem 1931.
CHATS (Cay. N.) ; pending.

CHEOPS TB-B3D (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,
S. N. II. F., 1933 ; Gard. Chron.
3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June 1933.
CLEMENCE ISAURE (Cay. N.) ;
pending.

CORINTHE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
COURTISANE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
CUPIDON (Cay. N.) ; pending.
DRESDEN CHINA TB-W2M
(Baker-G.P. N.) ; Bronze Medal,

R. II. S., 1933; Gard. Ill. 54: 354.
17 June 1933.

E. B. WILLIAMSON (Wmsn. N.) ;
pending.

ELECTEE CAYEUX TB-S1L (Cay.

1931); FAectre (Cay.).

EMBLEME (Cay. N.) ; pending.
EMOTION (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ENIGME (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ENSATA GRANDIFLORA Ens-B
(Collect. Thibet) ; Dykes Handbk.
141, 1924; enscita oxypetala.
ENSATA GRANDIFLORA ALBA
Ens-WW ; Ohio State Bot. Gard.
1933.

EPI D ’OR (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ESPANA (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ESPOIR (Cay. N.) ; pending.
EURYCLEE TB-B3M (Vilm. N.) ;
C. M., S. N. II. F., 1933; Gard.
Chron. 3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June
1933.

EVEREST TB- (Mur. N.) ; pending.
FAKIR TB-B7D (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,

S. N. II. F., 1933; Gard. Chron.
3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June 1933.

[42]

FARFADET (Cay. N.) ; pending.
FETICHE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
FLEUR D ’OR (Cay. N.) ; pending.
FReTILLON (Cay. N.) ; pending.

GALIBOTTE (Cay. N.) ; pending.

GEYA (Dykes-K. N.) ; J. R. H. S.
#1, 1933.

GOLD FLAKE TB-W8D (Mur.
1933); Orp. 1933; (Wm. R. Dykes
x . ).

GRINGOIRE (Cay. N.) ; pending.

HABANERA (Cay. N.) ; pending.

HAREBELL (Burgess N.) ; pend¬
ing.

H. C. VAN VLIET Dut- (deG. N.) ;

A. M., Haarlem 1931.
HELIANTHE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
ICULISMA (Cay. N.) ; pending.
IDYLLE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
I-LIKA DB- (Hires N.) ; pending.
IMWALD (G & K); Wass. 1933;
pending.

INGENIEUR WINSSINGER TB-
S7D (Denis bef. 1933) ; Salb. 1933.
JAN KRUSEMAN Dut-W4; A. M.,
Haarlem 1931.

J. M. DUVERNAY TB-S3M (Cay.
1933); C. M., S. N. Id. F., 1933;
Gard. C'hron. 3rd ser. 93: 409. 10
June 1933; Duvernay.

JOCELYN (Cay. N.) ; pending.
JUBA TB-R3M (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,
S. N. H. F., 1933; Rev. Hort. 105 :
413. 16 June 1933.

KIDAL (Cay. N.) ; pending.

K. MOLENAER Dut- (deG. N.) ;
A. M., Haarlem 1930.

LADY BEATRICE STANLEY Ret-
B2L ; Gard. Ill. 54: 722, 3 Dec.
1932 ; var. of histrioides.

LADY BLEDISLOE (Burgess N.) ;
pending.

LAOTIEN (Cay. N.) ; pending.
LEO DELIBES TB-S5D (Cay.
1933).

LONDON PRIDE TB-R9L (Mur.
1933); Orp. 1933; (Aphrodite x
. ).

LORD OF THE WEST pending.
LUTETIA (Cay. N.) ; pending.
MADAME G. MILLET TB-S3D ; C.

M. , S. N. H. F., 1933; Gard.
Chron. 3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June
1933; pending.

MADRIGAL TB-W8D (Mur. N.) ;
(seedling containing Imperator
and Aphrodite) ; C. M., Iris Soc.
(Eng.) 1933; C. Prelim. Conn, R.
H. S. 1933; by letter from Mrs.
O. Murrell.

MAMARU (Cay. N.) ; pending.
MANET TB-FF-S6D rev. (Cay.
1933).

MARIVAUX (Cay. N.) ; pending.
MARY PARK (Snow N.) ; pending.
MAYFAIR TBS9M (Mur. 1933);
Orp. 1933.

MEHUL TB-S4M rev. (Cay. 1933).
MORGANE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
MRS. H. D. BENNETT (Burgess

N. ) ; pending.

NEPTUNUS RC-S3M (Van T. N.) ;

A. M., Haarlem 1930.

NEREE TB-S3M (Vilrn. N.) ; C. M.,
S. N. H. F., 1933; Gard. Chron.
3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June 1933.
NICOLE LASSAILLY (Cay. N.) ;
pending.

NO-NEDA DB- (Hires N.) ; pend¬
ing.

NUAGE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
PAILLASSE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
P. C. SOUTMAN Dut-W4 (deG. N.) ;

A. M., Haarlem 1930.
PERIHELION (Snow N.) ; pending.
PERSIAN PRINCESS TMB-S7D
(Dean 1933) ; So. Cal. 1933.

PINK LOTUS TB F-R7L (Neel
1933) ; Orp. 1933.

PRAXITELE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
PRESIDENT LEBRUN TB-S6D
(Cay. 1933).

PRINSES JULIANA Eng-B3D (By-
voet 1928 (?)); A. M., Haarlem
1930; Princess Juliana.

[43]

PURPLE HEIGHTS (Burgess N.) ;
pending.

RABAGAS (Cay. N.) ; pending.
RADIANT MORN (Burgess N.) ;
pending.

RRANGATIRA (Burgess N.) ; pend¬
ing.

REDEMPTION TB-B7L (Cay. N.) ;
C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933; Rev.
I-Iort. 105: 413. 16 June 1933.
RIALTO TB-FB1M (Bliss 1927);
Orj). 1933.

SALTARELLE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
SERBIAN MAJOR TB-B3M (1933);
Orp. 1933; □; Coll. Serbia 1914-
1918; sent to Orp. by Mr. Foster-
Melliar.

SOUDANAIS (Cay. N.) ; pending.

SOUVENIR DE MA MERE (Cay.
N.) ; pending.

TAG AD A (Cay. N.) ; pending.
THEODORA CAYEUX TB-S9M
(Cay. bef. 1931); Theodora (Cay.).
THERMIDOR (Cay. N.) ; pending.
TIRABA (Cay. N.) ; pending.
TONKINOIS (Cay. N.) ; pending.
TRIOMPIIANT (Cay. N.) ; pending.
UNIVERSE Jap-Dbl-3; Burpee 1933.
VERITE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
VIVANDIERE (Cay. N.) ; pending.
WE-DAMA DB- (Hires N.) ; pend¬
ing.

WHITE LANCE Spur-WW (San.-
L.W.; Cooley 1933); Cooley 1933.
WIELAND Dut-BIM A. M., Haar¬
lem, 1931.

NAMES UNDER INVESTIGATION

Some of these may prove to be synonyms, but those which may be found,
after investigation, to be new varieties with approvable names will then be

admitted to the Approved List, and in

Coronation Imperial. TB- Wass. 1933.
Dutch Beauty. Hort. July 15, 246,
1933.

Elfin Sprite. DB-WW (not Mor.) ; A.

I. S. Bull., July, 1933.

Faitii. Correvon 1933.

Hollies (Perry N.) ; J. R. II. S., #1,

some instances registered.

1933 ; Perry says this is a num¬
bered seedling which remains to be
identified.

Little Bride. Ret-W. Gard. Ill. 54:

119. 4 Mar. 1933.

MacDoners. Sib- Correvon 1933.
Sky-No-Ryo. Jap-Dbl-3. Burpee 1933.

Blue Danube (Meyer-R.II.

Bronze Medal, R. II. S., 1933.
Bralliar’s Branching. TB-B3D (Bral.
bef. 1933) ; Ashley 1933.

Bralliar’s Giant Bicolor. TB-M-Y9D
Bral. bef. 1933); Ashley 1933.

Cybele. TB-B7M (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,
S. N. II. F., 1933 ; Gard. Chron.
3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June 1933.

Degas. TB-S8L (Cay. 1933).

Grey Dawn. TB- (Gotts. 1933); will
be discontinued.

Hermione. TB-S4M (Cay. N.) ; C.
M., S. N. H. F., 1933; Gard.

Chron. 3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June,
1933.

Horace. TB-Y4L (Cay. N.) ; C. M.,
S. N. H. F., 1933; Gard. Chron.
3rd Ser. 93: 409. 10 June 1933.
Kumochi-Guma. Jap-Dbl- Vaug. 1933.
Little Boy Blue. Sib-BIM (Clev.

1932) ; Nes. 1933.

Mozart. TB-S5M rev. (Cay. 1933).
Murillo. TB-S6M rev. (Cay. 1933).
Oceana. TB-Y4M (Cay. 1933).

VARIETIES WHOSE NAMES WERE UNAPPROVED IN 1933

N.);

[44]

Old Rose. TB- (Gotts. 1933) ; will
be discontinued.

Oriole. Spur-YIL (San.-L.W. ; Coo¬
ley 1933); Cooley 1933.

Proserpine. RC-S9M (Van T.) ; A.
M., Haarlem 1930.

Rosalinde. Eng-B3L rev. A. M.,
Haarlem 1930.

White Beauty. Eng-W2 (Elder.) ;
A. M., Haarlem 1931.

SYNONYMOUS NAMES OF 1933

Cataloguers whose names appear after the synonymous names will con¬
fer a favor on the Registration and Introduction Committee if they will use
the correct names in future editions of their literature. A bit of careful
proof-reading will prevent many of them, as most are just misspelled names.

Abode — ADOBE. Long. 1933.
Ahawnec — AHWAI1NEE. Schreiner
1933.

Albarte — ALBATRE. Schreiner 1933.
Allan Hoyt — ALAN HOYT. Stoner
1933.

All-Lu-Wee — AL-LU-WEE. W a s s .
1933.

Ambassador — -AMBASSADEUR. Pu-
dor 1933.

A. M. Cayeux — ANNE MARIE CAY-
EUX. Card. 111. 55: 311. 27 May
1933.

Avator — AVATAR. Schreiner 1933.
Avigata — AIOIGATA. Wayside 1933.
Avril 27 — 27 AVRIL. Wass. 1933.
Blue Bonnet — BLUEBONNET. Wass.
1933.

Blue Horizon — -S. DE VLIEGER.
Burpee 1933.

Boadicae — BOADICEA. Schreiner
1933.

Bolling B r ole e — BOLINGBROKE.
Wass. 1933.

Brautjunfer — BRAUTJUNGFER.
Ainsley 1933.

Brittoness — BRITONESS. Cooley
1933.

Caesar 77— CAEZARS BROTHER.
Stoner 1933.

Calibee — CALEBEE. Schreiner 1933.

Camelliard — CAMELIARD. Cooley
1933.

Camillia Dubur — CAMILLA DU-
BUAR. Wass. 1933.

Chaemae Iris Aurea — CHAMAEIRIS
AUREA. Schreiner 1933.

Chaernae Iris Naomi — CHAMAEIRIS
NAOMI. Schreiner 1933.

Chameur — CIIARMEUR. Schreiner
1933.

Church Mouse — CIIURC1IMOUSE.
Wass. 1933.

Concohbar — CONCHOBAR. Wass.
1933.

Conte Hautefeule - — COMTESSE
D’HAUTEVILLE. Schreiner 1933.
Cordun Blue— CORDON BLEU.
Wass. 1933.

Corolian — C O R I O L A N. Schreiner
1933.

Hiximunde - — - DIXMUDE. Schreiner
1933.

Dixmunde — DIXMUDE. Wass. 1933.
Holy Madison— DOLLY MADISON.
Handle. 1933.

Dorothy K. Williamson — DOROTHEA
Iv. WILLIAMSON. Vaug. 1933.
Doza — DOXA. Schreiner 1933.

Ethel Wynn Dubuar — ETIIELWYN
DUBUAR. Schreiner 1933.
Flamenschwert — F L A M M E N -
SCHWERT. Schreiner 1933.

145]

Flammerschwert — F L A M M E N -
SCHWERT. Wass. 1933.

Freicla Molir— F R I E D A MOHR.
Vaug. 1933.

Fuerstin Lon jay- — FUERSTIN LON-
YAY. Schreiner 1933.

Garvan — -PAR VAR. Ilill-H.M. 1933.
Gaviotta — G A V I O T A . Schreiner
1933.

Germaine Perthius — G ERMAINE
PERTHUIS. Wass. 1933.

Goldvliss — - GOLDVLIES. Schreiner
1933.

Gowing Embers — GLOWING EM¬
BERS. Kingsley 1933.

Graminae — GRAMINEA. Wass. 1933.
Heather Stone Copper — HEARTH¬
STONE COPPER. Wass. 1933.
Helaine — HELIANE. Schreiner 1933.
Henri River ier- — HENRI RIVIERE.
Schreiner 1933.

Hypnus — IIYPNOS. Schreiner 1933.
Iceberg (Dykes) ■ — - GLACILLA
(Dykes-K.). Schreiner 1933.

Indian C h i e f— W. VERSCIIUUR.
Burpee 1933.

Kestral — KESTREL. Schreiner 1933.
Kynsna — KNYSNA. Wass. 1933.

La Finace — FIANCEE DB. Schreiner
1933.

L ’ Harbaudiere — L ’ll AUB AUDIERE.
Schreiner 1933.

Lord Wolsey — LORD WOLSELEY.

Schreiner 1933; Stoner 1933.
Lullworth — LULW ORTII. Schreiner
1933.

Ma Mel— MA MIE. Wass. 1933.
Marion Lapham — MARIAN LAP-
HAM. Schreiner 1933.

Mareschall Ney— M ARESCIIAL
NEY. Schreiner 1933.

Mare sell el Ney — M A R E S C II A L
NEY. Schreiner 1933.

Marshall Focli— MARSHAL FOCH.
Schreiner 1933.

Mel choir — M E L C H I O R. Schreiner
1933; Wass. 1933.

Mich. Charrier — MICHELINE
CHARRIERE. Schreiner 1933.
Migonette — MIGNONETTE. Schrein¬
er 1933.

Minnie ford — MINNIE FORD. J. R.
II. S., #1, 1933.

Mile. Suz. Woolfrey — M L L E. SU¬
ZANNE WOOLFRY. Schreiner
1933.

Mine. Abel Cliatney — MME. ABEL
OHATENAY. Schreiner 1933.
Mine. Abel Chautney — MME. ABEL
CHATENAY. Wass. 1933.

Mme. de Beaumarcliis — MME. DE
BEAUMARCHAIS. Schreiner 1933.
Mme. Henri Caycu — MME. HENRI
CAYEUX. Wass. 1933.

Mme. Suz. Woolfrey — M L L E. SU¬
ZANNE WOOLFRY. Schreiner
1933.

Morning Dove — MOURNING DOVE.
Wass. 1933.

Mrs. N ewbronner — MRS. NEUBRON-
NER, Wass. 1933.

Mrs. R. C. Boutellier— MRS. R. C.
BOETTCHER. A. I. S. Bull.,
April, 1933.

Mt. Mist— M O U N T A I N MIST.
Schreiner 1933.

M^ystrey — MYSTERY. Schreiner 1933.
Natalis — NATHALIS. Wass. 1933.
Nepthne — NEPENTHE. Wass. 1933.
N ingall — NINGAL. Wass. 1933.
Norrona — NORRENA. Wass. 1933.
Ochraleuca — ochroleuca. Stoner 1933.
Okabodji — OKOBOJI. Schreiner 1933.
Oliver Perthius — -OLIVIER PER¬
THUIS. Schreiner 1933.

Pallida Astarte — ASTARTE. Pfeif.
1933.

Pa rad oxa al b o-lut e see ns — C HOSIIAB.
Peltit Yitry — PETIT VITRY. Wells
1933.

Pervenali — PERVANEII. Schreiner
1933.

[46]

Pctie Daniel — PETITE DANIEL.
Schreiner 1933.

Polinchinelle — POLICHINELLE.
Schreiner 1933.

Pont. Mousson — PONT - A - MOUS -
SON. Wass. 1933.

Prosper Laguier — PROSPER LAU-
GIER. Vaug. 1933.

Queen Alexander — QUEEN ALEX¬
ANDRA. Totty 1933.

Raligar — RIALGAR. Wass. 1933.
Richard 111— RICHARD II. Gard.

Ill. 55: 292. 20 May 1933.
Rosakura — RASAKURA. Schreiner
1933.

Rousultra — ROSULTRA. A i n s 1 e y
1933.

Schneecuppe — SCHNEEKUPPE.
Pitysm. 1933.

Schneekonigin — SNOW QUEEN.
Pfitzer 1933.

Sliiawasse — SHIAWASSEE. Schrein¬
er 1933.

Shiwassee — SHIAWASSEE. Wass.
1933.

Shot Shades (Per. N.) — SHOT SILK
(Mur.). J. R. II. S. #1, 1933; Per¬
ry advises he does not know it.
Shrewi — SHREVEI. Correvon 1933.
Simonie Vassiere — SIMONE VAIS-
SIERE. Wass. 1933.

Sir M wheal — SIR MICHAEL. Wass.
1933.

Skitchewang — SKITCHEWAUG.
Wass. 1933.

Snowliite — SNOW WHITE. Schreiner
1933.

Snow- Top (syn. Schneekuppe) —
SCHNEEKUPPE. Pudor 1933.
Souv. Mme. Gaudichau — SOUV. DE
MME. GAUDICHAU. Long-J. D.
1933.

Sunnybroke — S UNNYBROOK.
Schreiner 1933.

Theresa Schwartza — - TIIERESE
SCHWARTZ. Pudor 1933.

Thesus — THESEUS. Schreiner 1933.
Thorodred — THOROBRED. Wass.
1933.

Uniflora — ruthenica. Pearce 1933.
Vert-Galcmt— VERT G A L A N T.

Schreiner 1933.

Violet Queen — W. ZUIDERVELT.
Burpee 1933.

Winneshiek — W INNIES1IIEK.
Schreiner 1933.

Yves Laiassailly — YVES LASSAIL-
LY. Schreiner 1933.

Zwanemburg — ZWANENBURG.
Schreiner 1933.

INTRODUCTIONS OF 1933

Including some of previous years not before published.

Uncapitalized are unapproved or under investigation.

ALADDINS LAMP. Spur-Y4D (San.-L. W. 1933) ; Cooley, 1933.

ALCEE. IB-B7M (Yilm. 1922); C. M., S. N. 11. F. 1930; Bull. Men. de la
Soc. Nat. d’Hort. de France, Mar., 1934, 133.

ALICE HARDING. TB-Y4L (Cay. 1933) ; Roi Soled,

ALKINAII. TB-M-B1M (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

ASMODEE. TB-S3D (Vilm. 1925); Bull., Men. de la Soc. Nat. d’Hort. de
France, Mar., 1934, 133.

ATTITASIi. TB-S3L (Dennett 1933); Riverview, 1933,

aurcinitica. Onc-S4D (John Edward Dinsmore, from El Ilauran, Syria 1933) ;
R., 1934.

AUGUST FLAME. Fulv-FF-R7M (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R., 1933.

AUTUMN FIRE. Fulv-FF-R7M (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R., 1933.

BALROUDOUR. DMB-E-S3L (Sass-J. 1933) ; R., 1933.

BARRICOU. TB-R9D (Cay. 1933); C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933; Bull. Men.

de la Soc. Nat. dHIort. de France, Mar., 1934, 133.

BAYOU BARATARIA. Hex-radieristatae-MF-BIL (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R.,

1933.

BILOXI. Hex-radicristatae-MF-W2L (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R., 1933.

BLANC MIGNON. Jap-Dbl-1 (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1933.

BLUE DANUBE. TB-B1M (Meyer-R. II. 1932); Orp. 1932; Bronze Medal
R. H. S., 1933; R., 1934.

BLUE MONARCH. TB-F-S1D (Sass-J. 1933) ; R., 1933.

BLUE TOPAZ. DMB-E-S3M (Sass.-J. 1933); R., 1933.

Bralliars Branching. TB-B3D (Bralliar bef. 1933) ; Ashley, 1933.
BRALLIARS GIANT. TB-E-R7L (Bralliar bef. 1933); Ashley, 1933.
Bralliars Giant Bicolor. TB-B3I) (Bralliar bef. 1933) ; Ashley, 1933.
BRIGHT BALLOON. TB-Y4 (Waller 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1930.
BRIGHTNESS. DB-E-Y4M (Emig. 1933); Kenwood, 1933; R., 1933.
BROCADE. TB-M-S9D (Berry 1933) ; R., 1932.

BURGUNDIAN. TB-E-RID (Dan. 1927) ; R., 1934.

CALIFORNIA GOLD. TB-M-Y4D (Mohr-Mit. 1933); Salb., 1933; R., 1933.
CALINDA. TB-M-S4L (Reibold 1933); Berry, 1933; R., 1933.
CAMPANILE. TB-M-B1M (Dan. 1927); R., 1934.

Candeur. TB-WW (Nonin bef. 1934); Bull. Men. de la Soc. Nat. d’Hort.
de France, Mar., 1934, 133.

CARRARA. TB-M-WW (Doub 1933); Kellogg, 1933; R., 1932.
CASTALIA. TB-M-BIL (Wmsn. 1933); Long., 1933; R., 1933.
CHARLES HARDEE. Laev-MF-BID (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.

CHEF MENTEUR, Yinic-MF-B7D (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
COLUMBIA. TB-M-S7L (Dan. 1924); It., 1934.

CUDBEAR. TB-M-R1M (Doub 1933); Kellogg, 1933; R., 1932.
DAWNAVA. TB-M-S7M (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

Degas. TB-S8L (Cay. 1933).

DELLA ROBBIA. Jap-Dbl-3 (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1933.

DRESDEN. IB-E-R8L (Richer 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1932.
DRESDEN BLUE. Jap-Sgl-6 (Nes. 1933); R., 1933.

ECLAT. TB-MF-S4M (Gage 1933); Nes., 1934; R., 1933.

ELEANOR BLUE. TB-M-BIL (Salb. 1933); R., 1933.

ELECTRE CAYEUX. TB-S1L (Cay. 1931); R., 1933; Electre.

EL TOVAR. TB-R1 (Sass-J. 1933); R., 1929.

ELYSIAN. TB-Y4M (Saur. 1932); R., 1926; II. M., A. I. S., 1932; Etesian.
ENSATA GRANDIFLORA. Ens-B (Collect. Tibet).

ENSATA GRANDIFLORA ALBA. Ens-WW. Ohio State Bot. Gard., 1933.
ERMINE. TB-E-W2D (Richer 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1932.
ESPLANADE. Fulv-MF-R8M (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R., 1933.

Faitii. Correvon 1933. Probably taitii.

[48]

FLORENCE ZACHARIE. Hex-radieristatae-MF-BIM (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R.,
1933.

FLYING CLOUD. Jap-Sgl-5 (Nes. 1933); R., 1933.

FRENIER. Laev-MF-B7L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.

FROST QUEEN. IB-M-FF-WW (Sass-H. P.; Hill-II. M., 1933); Hill-H.
M., 1933; R., 1933.

GEORGIAN BAY. Pris-MF-B7M (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
GIGANTICAERULEA ALBA. Hex-radicristatae-MF-WW (Nic.-Jr. 1932) ;
R., 1933.

GLORIOLE. TB-F-B1L (Gage 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1932.

GOLD FLAKE. TB-W8D (Mur. 1933) ; Orp., 1933.

GOLD FOAM. TB-Y4L (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1931.

GOLD VELLUM. IB F-Y4L (Gage 1933); Nes., 1934; R., 1933.
GOLDEN HELMET. TB-F-S9M (Sass-J. 1933) ; R., 1933.

GOLDEN LIGHT. TB-F-S4 (Sass-H. P. 1933); Nes., 1934; R., 1932.
GRAECA. Jap-Dbl-5 (Waterer 1932) ; Waterer 1932 as Nymplie ; R., 1933.
GRAY CLOUD. DMB-E-S2M (Sass-J. 1933) ; R., 1933.

Grey Dawn. TB- (Gotts. 1933) ; to be withdrawn.

IBERVILLE. Hex-radicristatae-MF-BIM (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.

ICY GLOW. DB-E-W6M (Emig. 1933); Kenwood, 1933; R., 1933.
IMPERIAL BLUSH. TB-F-R7L (Sass-H. P. 1933); Nes., 1934; R., 1932.
IMWALD. TB- (G & K bef. 1933) ; Wass., 1933.

INGENIEUR WINSSINGER. TB-S7D (Denis bef. 1933) ; Salb., 1933.
JAMES ZACHARIE. Vinic-MF-BID (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.

JEAN, VOILA JEAN. TB-E-R3D (Dan. 1927); R., 1934; Jean Viola Jean.
JERRY. TB-MF-S9D (Lap. 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1931.

J. M. DUVERNAY. TB-S3M (Cay. 1933); Duvernay.

KATISJIA. TB-F-S9L (Ilall 1933); R., 1932.

KENWOOD. TB-S9D (Ayres 1933); Kenwood, 1933; R., 1931.
KEYSTONE. TB-MF-R1M (McKee 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1932.
KIIALASA. TB-B7D (Sher. 1933); Kellogg, 1933; R., 1931.
KILSOQUAH. TB-E-S9D (Richer 1933); Kellogg, 1933; R., 1932.
KING JUNIOR, IB-M-FF B3M (Sass-H. P.; Hill-H. M. 1933); Hill-H. M.,
1933; R., 1933; Autumn King Junior.

KING PELLES. Jap- (Waterer 1932) ; Waterer 1932 as Ulysses; R., 1933.
KING PHILIP. TB-E-B7M (Fewkes 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1932.
Kumochi-Guma. Jap-Dbl-6D. Vang., 1933.

LAURA HUTCHESON. IB-M-FF-B3D (Sass-H. P.; IIill-11. M. 1933);

Hill-H. M., 1933; R., 1933.

LEO DELIBES. TB-S5D (Cay. 1933).

LE VIE/UX CARRE ’. Fulv-MF-R7M (Nic.-J. 1933); R., 1933.

LILY CREAMER. TB-M-S7L (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

Little Boy Blue. Sib-BIM (Cleve. 1932); Nes., 1933.

LITTLE SMOKY. TB-M-B1D (Essig 1933); R., 1933.

LONDON PRIDE. TB-R9L (Mur. 1933); Orp., 1933; R., 1933.
LOUISIANA SUNSET. Fulv-MF-R7D (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
MacDoners. Sib- Correvon 1933.

[49]

MADAME DARIDAN. TB-Y9M (Denis 1933); Cay. 1933; C. M., S. N.
H. F., 1933.

MAGNA CHARTA. IB-F-W2D (Dan. 1931); R., 1934.

MALUSKA. TB-F-R7D (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1933.

MANDEYILLE. Hex-radicristatae-MF B7L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
MANET. TB-FF-S6D rev. (Cay. 1933).

MARGOT CASTELLANOS. Fulv-MF-R7L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
MARIA CHAPPEDELAINE. TB-W2L (Cay. 1932) ; C. M., S. N. H. F.,
1932.

MARMARGE. TB-M-B1M (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

MARPESSA. Jap-Dbl-5 (Waterer 1932) ; Waterer 1932 as Siren; R., 1933.
MASQUE. TB-B3M (Cay. 1933); C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933.

MAYFAIR. TB-S9M (Mur. 1933); Orp., 1933; R., 1933.

MECCA. Jap-Sgl-3 (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1933.

MEIIUL. TB-S4M rev. (Cay. 1933).

MINSTRING. TB-M-B1L (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

MINTGER, TB-M-B1L (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

Morphee. TB-B9D (Vilm. 1926).

MOUSQUETAIRE. TB-B1M (Cay. 1933); C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933.
Mozart. TB-S5M rev. (Cay. 1933).

MRS. CREAMER. TB-M-W7L (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

MT. WHITNEY. Spur-W4 (Millik. 1933); So. Cal., 1933; R., 1933.
Murillo. TB-S6M rev. (Cay. 1933).

NATIONAL PROSPERITY. TB-B9D (National 1933) ; R., 1933.
NAVADAW. IB-M-S7M (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

NEVA. Jap-Sgl-3 (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1933.

NORMA GAGE. TB F-R1L (Gage 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1932.

Oceana. TB-Y4M (Cay. 1933).

OCTOBER BLUE. IB-M-FF-B1M (Sass-H. P. ; Hill-H. M. 1933); Hill-
H. M., 1933; R., 1933.

OGLETHORPE. Laev-MF-BIL (Nic-Jr. 1933); R,, 1933.

Old Rose. TB- (Gotts. 1933) ; to be discontinued.

OLYMPIC. TB-EM-W1M (Berry 1933); R., 1933.

OMPIIALE. TB-B9M (Cay. 1933) ; C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933.

OPAL BLUE. Sib-BIL (Sturt,; Nes. 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1933.
ORIANA. TB-F-W1 (Sass-H. P., 1933); Nes. 1934; R., 1932.

Oriole. Spur-YIL (San.-L. W. 1933) ; Cooley, 1933.

PALATLAS. TB-E-B7L (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

PERSIAN PRINCESS. TMB-S7D (Dean 1933) ; So. Cal., 1933.

PINK JEWEL. IB-M-R7L (Salb. 1933); R., 1933.

PINK LOTUS. TB-F-R7L (Neel 1933); Orp., 1933; R., 1933.
PLURABELLE. TB-Y9M (Cay. 1933); R., 1933.

POINT ALA HACHE. Vinic-MF-B7D (Nic.-Jr. 1933) ; R., 1933.
PONTCHAR TRAIN. Hex-MF-B7L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
PRESIDENT LEBRUN. TB-S6D (Cay. 1933).

PRESIDENT PILKINGTON. TB-S1M (Cay. 1933).

[50]

PRINSES JULIANA. Eng-B3D (Byvoet 1928 (!) ).

PROFESSEUR MITCHELL. TB-B7D (Cay. 1933) ; C. M. & Spec. Prize,
S. N. H. F., 1933 ; Professeur S. B. Mitchell.

PURPLE GIANT. TB-B1D (Gage 1933); R., 1933.

PURPLE NIGHT. TB-B7D (Richer 1933); Kellogg, 1933; R., 1931.
PURPLUM. IB-F-R3D (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

RAE. TB-Y4M (Loth. 1932); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1930; H. M., A. I. S.,
1930.

RAFI. TB-Y9M (Mur. 1933); Orp., 1933; C. M., Iris Soc. (Eng.), 1931.
RED BEAUTY. IB-M-R9M (Gage 1933); Nes. 1933; R., 1932.
REDGLOW. TB-F-S9D (Essig 1933); R., 1933.

RIALTO. TB-F-B1M (Bliss 1927); Orp., 1933.

Romance. TB-B7M (Cay. 1933); C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933; Bull. Men. de
la Soc. Nat. d’Hort. de France, Mar., 1934, 133.

ROSE DUBARRY. Jap-Dbl-3 (Nes. 1933); R., 1933.

ROSE MIGNON. Jap-Sgl-5 (Nes. 1933); R., 1933.

ROXANE. TB-B9D (Cay. bef. 1932).

SAN. DB-E-Y4L (Hires, inf. distrib. 1933) ; R., 1933.

SANDY. IB-M-S5M (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

SARANOLE. TB-M-R7M (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

SARSEM. TB-M-R9L (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

Satan. TB-W3D (Cay. bef. 1932) ; C. M., S. N. H. F.

SAZERAC. Fulv-MF-R7M (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.

SEDUCTION. TB-W5M (Cay. 1933); C. M., & Spec. Prize, S. N. H. F.,
1933.

SEMBAN. TB-M-B9M (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

SEMISAR, TB-M-R3L (Creamer 1933) ; R., 1933.

SEPTEMBER SKIES. IB-M-FF-B7D (Sass-II. P. ; Hill-11. M. 1933);

Hill-H. M., 1933; R., 1933.

SERBIAN MAJOR. TB-B3M (1933); Orp., 1933.

SISTER, TB-F-R3L (Sturt. 1933); R., 1933.

Sky-No-Ryo. Jap-Dbl-3. Burpee, 1933.

SNOWMAID. Jap-Sgl-1 (Nes. 1933) ; R., 1933.

SPANISH FORT. Hex-radicristatae-MF-B8L (Nic.-Jr. 1933); R., 1933.
SPOKAN. TB-F-S9D (Sass-J. 1933); R., 1933.

STANWIX. TBF-B3M (Hall 1933); R., 1932.

STORMY DAWN. DMB-E-S3L (Sass-J. 1933); R., 1933.

SUNOL. TB-M-S4D (Mohr-Mit. 1933); Salb., 1933; R., 1933.

SWEET AUBURN. TB-E-W7 (Fewkes 1933); Nes., 1933; R., 1932.
SYLVIA LENT. TB-M-Y5L (Shull 1933); R., 1933.

THEME. TB S7M (Loth. 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1930; H. M., A. I. S.,
1930.

THESEE. TB-W2M (Vilm. 1922); C. M., S. N. H. F., 1929; Bull. Men. de
la Soc. Nat. d’Hort, de France, Mar., 1934, 133.

THISTLEDOWN. TB-W9L rev. (Sturt. 1933); R., 1930.

[51]

TIMGAD. TB-W8D rev. (Cay. 1933); C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933.
TRISTE, TB-S9M (Mur. 1929) ; Orp. 1929.

URIAH. TB-M-S9D (Essig 1933) ; R., 1933.

UNIVERSE. Jap-Dbl-3 (Burpee 1933).

VELVO. DMB-E-R3M (Sass-J. 1933); R., 1933.

Volupte. TB-R6M (Cay. 1933) ; C. M., S. N. H. F., 1933.

WAWASEE. TB-M-B1L (Richer 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1932.
WESTLANDER. TB-M-B3D (Essig 1933); R., 1933.

WHITE LANCE. Spur-WW (San.-L. W. ; Cooley 1933); Cooley, 1933.
WILBICO. TB-M-B9D (Creamer 1933); B., 1933.

WINTER SKIES. Jap-Sgl-7 (Nes. 1933); R., 1933.

Wisteria. Sib-BIM (And. 1933).

W ON DERCHILD . TB-B9D (National 1933); R., 1933.

WOTAN. TB-M-B7D (Grinter 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1932.
YELLOW BANKS. IB-M-Y5D (Richer 1933); Kellogg, 1934; R., 1932.
ZINGARELLA. TB-B7D (Cay. 1931).

ZOUALTA. TB-M-R2M (Creamer 1933); R., 1933.

[52]

EXHIBITION POLICY AND MANAGEMENT

Revised to January, 1934

The American Iris Society wishes to encourage the promotion
of Iris shows by co-operating with local groups, garden clubs,
horticultural societies, etc. This policy has proved so success¬
ful that over 135 shows have been held in all sections of the
country during the last 14 years. Based on this experience the
following revised pamphlet has been prepared.

Assistance may be extended both to special exhibitions of
Irises and to establish organizations which will feature five
or more Iris classes in their customary exhibits. Applications
for co-operation should be made to the Chairman of Exhibitions
as early in the year as possible.

Conditions of Co-operation

As the object of all exhibitions is to demonstrate the beauty of
the Iris and to raise the standard of Iris in gardens, all author¬
ized exhibitions must conform to the following regulations:

1. The proposed show schedule, and the list of proposed judges shall
be submitted to the Exhibition Chairman for approval, not less than ten
days before the show dates.

2. Amateur and commercial exhibitors shall show in separate classes.
A commercial grower is defined as 1 ‘ One who catalogs, lists or otherwise
advertises his or her productions for sale.” In event that there are more
commercial exhibitors than amateurs, at least three to five classes must
be provided for the amateurs. Any person conforming to rules is eligible
to compete.

3. Judges may withhold any award, if in their opinion it is not up to
the required standard of excellence.

4. Requests for supplies must be in the hands of the Chairman not
later than May 1st.

5. The name, American Iris Society, shall be used on all schedules
and announcements, and due credit given for all assistance rendered.

6. Typewritten reports of the shows shall be forwarded to the Exhi¬
bition Chairman within two weeks after the show has been held.

7. Any award or other prize offered by the A. I. S. may be given only
as specified in the accompanying schedule, recommendations for awards to
seedlings shall be made only to those which are clearly distinct from or
notably superior to any now in commerce or already registered.

8. The Board of Directors of the American Iris Society, upon the
recommendation of the Exhibition Chairman, may refuse to award any
authorized medal or other awards, where it is shown that any of the above
rulings have not been complied with.

AWARDS OFFERED AT EXHIBITIONS

One Bronze Medal.

Silver Medals are intended for large shows, and require special authori¬
zation. The number each year is limited, and as it is the policy of the
Society to distribute them in as many different sections as possible, they
will not usually be given two years in succession for the same place.

One A. I. S. membership may be given to non-members, amateur, making
the most comprehensive display in Group III.

A. I. S. Certificate of Honorable Mention for seedlings may be recom¬
mended to the Committee on Awards.

Both commercial growers and amateurs are eligible to exhibit in the
seedling class, Group V.

SUPPLIES

The following* supplies may be obtained from the Chairman of
the Exhibition Committee at cost.

For the Show Committee

Entry Sheet for Secretary. Award Cards.

Judging Cards. 1st Prize Cards.

Donation Vouchers. 2nd Prize Cards.

3rd Prize Cards.

For the Exhibitor

Labels for varieties (small).

Posters for list of winners, and membership application blanks will be
provided.

Entry cards.

The following Bulletins are suggested for display at exhibi¬

tions.

No. 11. Beardless Irises . $ .50

No. 13. Classification . 50

No. 28. Symposium . : . 50

No. 35. Test and Display Gardens . 50

The local committee will be charged with the bulletins ordered,
and credited with such as are returned in good condition.

Available supplies will be forwarded and billed by the Exhibi¬
tion Chairman, but checks should be made payable, and billed to
the Treasurer of the A. I. S.

No other obligations are incurred by the Society except upon
special action of the Board of Directors.

[54]

RECOMMENDATIONS

Awards noted above are offered by the American Iris Society.
Any additional awards may be offered by the local committee
as desired, with the exception that none may be offered for seed¬
lings. Cash prizes are not prohibited, but it is suggested that
ribbons, plants, receptacles, garden books, magazines, etc., are
often equally or more desirable.

As heretofore a few nationally known nursery members have
received most of the requests to donate plants for prizes, the
members of local committees are asked to confine their efforts in
this line to their immediate district.

The value of premiums, whether cash, stock value, or plants,
should be comparable to the value of the respective classes.

SCHEDULE

The following schedule is arranged for an exhibition of the
largest type. For smaller shows, certain classes such as Nos. 7,
16, 17, 21 and 22 may be selected and the number of prizes may
be reduced as desired. From 20 to 25 classes are ample for the
largest shows. Schedules may be typed, mimeographed, or
printed as desired.

. (Insert name of local Club)

in co-operation with the

American Iris Society

Schedule of Prizes for the . Show

to be held
(where held)

(date)

(Subject to change owing to abnormal season)

Admission . Everyone invited to compete

Notice of entries and other inquiries should be sent to “Iris
Show Committee,” care of .

(give name and address) on or before

that the proper space may be reserved for each exhibitor.

All exhibits must be staged and ready for the judges at . (the

first day). Entries must be staged under number (obtained from the Sec¬
retary); exhibitors’ names to be attached after the awards are made.
Except in the artistic classes and in the seedling class, varieties must be
named and should be correctly labeled. Any exhibit which includes other
than the material specified in the schedule, either more or less, is subject
to disqualification.

[55]

No exhibitor shall receive more than one premium in any one Iris class.
If no competition develops, an exhibitor may be required to enter the near¬
est similar class. Any prize may be withheld at the discretion of the
judges, whose decision shall be final.

With the exception of the artistic arrangement classes all flowers shall
have been grown by the exhibitor.

Standards of Excellence
For Collections

f Variety of height and color according to section . 25

Apply to ^ General quality . . 25

Exhibit as Condition (freshness of blooms, etc.) . 25

- Appropriate to schedule, naming, etc . 25

100

In case of close competition judge each vase in accordance with the
standards of excellence for an individual variety.

For Artistic Arrangements

Arrangement . 25

Color harmony . 20

Quality of blooms . 20

Relation of receptacle . 15

Distinctiveness . 10

Appropriate to statement of schedule . 10

100

For Individual Varieties, All Garden Varieties, and Seedlings

The following scale of points shall be used for judging seedlings at
exhibitions :

j Quality .

I Condition

Color . 15

Form . 10

Flower 50% c Substance and Texture . 10

Size according to variety . 10

Fragrance . 5

Stalk 25%

Poise and grace according to section . 10

Number of blooms and buds according to sections . 5

Height according to section . 5

^ Branching according to section . 5

[56 j

100

Exhibition Committee recommends that the seedlings be judged by at
least 3 accredited judges.

Note: Standards of excellence can be applied to Dwarfs, Intermediates,
Beardless, Bulbous Iris, etc., as well as to Tall Bearded, if due allowance
is made for the variations characteristic of the respective sections.

Sweepstake (Medal or Cup)

The exhibitor winning' the most points in the Iris Division to
be awarded the . Medal of the American Iris Society.

Where both the Silver and the Bronze Medals are authorized,
the Silver Medal should be awarded for the most points won, and
the Bronze Medal may be awarded to the exhibitor scoring the
second highest number of points, or as a sweepstake in Group
III, but requests for placing this on other classes will be con¬
sidered. Where the exhibition is large enough to warrant both
the Silver and Bronze Medals, one should be awarded in the
amateur classes and the other in the commercial.

[57]

Group I

Beardless Iris Classes

No. 1. Collection of Irises, not Bearded (including sibirica, cristata,
etc.) 1 to 3 stalks of each variety, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

No. 2. Collection of Bulbous Irises (including Spanish, English, etc.)
1 to 3 stalks of each variety, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

No. 3. Collection of 6 distinct varieties of Irises, sibirica or orientalis,
3 stalks each, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

Note: In large exhibits classes may be added by specifying separate
colors, heights and sizes.

No. 4. Artistic display of not more than 25 stalks of Beardless Irises,
with own foliage, 3 prizes. Point score 10 — 5 — 3.

No. 5. Artistic display of not more than 10 stalks of Beardless Irises,
with or without other hardy flowers and foliage, 3 prizes. Point score
5—3—1.

Bearded Irises

No. 6. Artistic display of not more than 25 stalks and not more than 5
varieties of Bearded Irises, Avith or without other flowers and foliage, 3
prizes. Point score 10 — 5 — 3.

No. 7. Artistic display of not more than 10 stalks of Bearded Irises, with
own foliage, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

No. 8. Artistic display of Irises suitable for rock gardens, with other
rock plants, using tray . (size), 3 prizes. Point score 10 — 5 — 3.

No. 9. Artistic display of 10 stalks or more of one variety of Bearded
Irises, to suggest the effect of a garden clump (lifted plants are barred),
3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

In classes for artistic arrangements, receptacles must be provided by the
exhibitors at their own risk. Material need not be grown by the exhibitor.
Specify the type of container to be used in each class (e. g., baskets might
bo used in Class No. 6; low dishes in Class No. 7) as it is very hard to
judge artistic arrangements when exhibits in one class are shown in differ
ent types of containers.

The following Classes open to Bearded Irises only:

No. 10. A. Specimen stalk, self-colored white, 3 prizes. Point score
5—3—1.

B. Specimen stalk, white plicata, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

C. Specimen stalk, white bi-color, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

No. 11. Al. Specimen stalk, self-colored, lavender, light blue or mauve.
Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

A2. Specimen stalk, lavender, light blue or mauve bi-color.

Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

A3. Specimen stalk, self-colored, dark blue, red purple, or blue
purple. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

A4. Specimen stalk, dark blue, red purple, or blue purple bi-color.
Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

Bl. Specimen stalk, self-colored pink, 3 prizes. Point score

5—3—1.

B2. Specimen stalk, pink bi-color, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

Cl. Specimen stalk, self-colored red, 3 prizes. Point score

5—3—1.

C2. Specimen stalk, red bi-color, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

No. 12. A. Specimen stalk, light blends, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

B. Specimen stalk, dark blends, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

No. 13. A. Specimen stalk, self-colored yellow, 3 prizes. Point score

5—3—1.

B. Specimen stalk, yellow plicata, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

C. Specimen stalk, yellow bi-color, 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

(Follow latest A. I. S. classification in making entries in Specimen Stalk
classes.) (Bi-color refers to a marked contrast of tone or color between
standards and falls such as is often due to the velvety quality of the fall.)

Group II

(Not open to Exhibitors in Group III)

No. 14. Collection of 50 distinct varieties, 1 stalk of each, 3 prizes. Point
score 40 — 20 — 10.

No. 15. Collection of 25 distinct varieties, 1 stalk of each, 3 prizes. Point
score 20—10 — 5.

No. 16. Collection of 12 distinct varieties, 3 stalks of each, 3 prizes. Point
score 10 — 5 — 3.

No. 17. Collection of 6 distinct varieties, 3 stalks of each, 3 prizes. Point
§core 5 — 3 — 1.

[59 1

Group III

(Not open to Exhibitors in Group II)

No. 18. Collection of 10 distinct varieties, 1 stalk of each, 3 prizes. Point
score 10 — 5 — 3.

No. 19. Collection of 5 distinct varieties, 3 stalks of each, 3 prizes. Point
score 5 — 3—1.

No. 20. Collection from garden containing not over 25 varieties, 3 prizes.
Point score 6 — 3 — 1.

No. 21. Collection containing no variety priced at over 50c, 3 prizes. Point
score 6 — 3 — 1.

No. 22. Collection shown by exhibitor who has not previously exhibited at
a local A. I. S. show, 3 prizes. Point score 6 — 3 — 1.

Best specimen in Group III — -Point score 10 — 5 — 3.

Group IV

Group Exhibit by a Garden Club or Society

No. 23. Display of at least 10 varieties of Irises, with or without other

hardy flowers and foliage to cover at least 15 sep ft. (3' x 5'). Two

honorary prizes.

Group V

COMMERCIAL CLASSES

No. 23. A. Displays covering not more than 50 sq. ft. Point score
40—20—10.

No. 23. B. Best specimen, to be chosen from display. Point score

10—5—3.

No. 23. C. Artistic display of not more than 25 stalks and not more than
5 varieties of Bearded Irises, with or without other flowers
and foliage. Point score 10 — 5 — 3. Type of prizes to be

determined.

Specimen classes from No. 10 A. to No. 13 C. inclusive may be used in
the commercial class.

Group VI

Seedling Iris

(Open to All Exhibitors)

No. 24. Judging at Exhibitions.

Judges may make recommendation for Highly Commended:

At exhibitions in cooperation with the American Iris Society under the
following regulations:

Irises raised from seed by exhibitors, but not introduced to commerce.
(If the originator is unable to be present he may request another person to
exhibit for him, in which case if an award is made it will be sent to the
originator instead of the exhibitor.) From one to five flower stalks of each
seedling must be shown preferably with some of its own foliage. Judges are
instructed to give greater weight to seedlings of equal merit where more

[60]

stalks (up to the limit of five) are shown. It is recommended that no one
exhibitor should enter more than five seedlings, and it is further requested
that if possible the accredited judges do not recommend more than five
Highly Commendeds at any one show. (As the Society does not offer prizes
for seedlings, none may be offered by individuals or clubs at any show
receiving the American Iris Society cooperation.)

Group VII

The following classes are suggested for Special Shows of Japanese Iris,
or they may be used in connection with other flowers blooming at the same
time:

Class 29.

Collection

Japanese Irises, one stalk

each variety.

Three

prizes. Point score 20

-10-

-5.

Class 30.

J apanese

Irises,

3 to 6

stalks one variety. 3 prizes.

Point

score 10 — 5-

—3.

Class 31.

Specimen

stalk

Japanese

Iris, white.

3 prizes. Point

score

5—3—1.

Class 32.

Specimen

stalk

Japanese

Iris, purple.

3 prizes. Point

score

5—3—1.

Class 33.

Specimen

stalk

Japanese

Iris, pink. «:

] prizes. Point

score

5—3—1.

Class 34.

Specimen

stalk

Japanese

Iris, blue tones. 3 prizes.

Point

score 5 — 3 —

Class 35.

Specimen

stalk

Japanese

Iris, splotched

or striped. 3 ;

prizes.

Point score 5 — -3 — 1.

Class 36. Artistic arrangement in the Japanese manner in a low re¬

ceptacle. 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3—1.

Class 37. Artistic arrangement of not less than 15 stalks with other
flowers and foliage. 3 prizes. Point score 5 — 3 — 1.

For a large show sub-divide various Japanese Iris classes as desired into
A, single, B, double.

Also add any one or all of classes 1 — 5 if season warrants.

Show Management

Show management may be divided as

MANAGEE

Entry Classification Staging

Secretary Classification Chairman

Asst. Secretary Committee Staging

Committee

Duties of the Show Manager

The Manager shall have general supervision of the hall, ar¬
rangement of tables, exhibits, etc., but should have no detail to
attend to during the show, as general supervision is necessary.

He shall instruct the various subcommittees and assistants in
their duties.

follows :

Publicity

Press

Committee

[61]

Duties of the Show Secretary and Assistants

The Show Secretary should send notices to prospective ex¬
hibitors two weeks in advance, enclosing entry cards. Those
cards with the classes listed which the Exhibitor intends to
enter should be returned to the Secretary or Manager as early
as possible.

On the day of the show the Secretary shall have all his records
at a convenient desk and shall turn over entries to staging com¬
mittee, and shall receive reports of judges; prepare a list of
winners and report of the show giving copies to the Press Com¬
mittee and to the A. I. S. Exhibition Chairman.

An Assistant Secretary shall wait on the judges, placing award
cards, etc. ; a complete list of winners shall be posted.

The Secretary should take notes on the show, collect all avail¬
able press notices, etc., and should forward immediately a full
report of the show to the chairman of the A. I. S. Exhibition
Committee. ' ♦ j

Prize cards or ribbons should be sent to the winners, together
with donation vouchers or other proof of awards.

Duties of Classification Committee

The Classification Committee shall help each exhibitor to place
his or her flowers in the proper classes and to label them cor¬
rectly.

This Committee should see that all exhibits are in accordance
with the requirements of their schedule before they are sub¬
mitted to the judges.

Duties of the Staging Committee

Sometime before the show the Staging Committee shall make a
map of the hall and of the arrangement of the tables, marking
thereon the space and location allotted to each class. Suitable
containers filled with water shall be provided, except in classes
for artistic arrangement.

On the day of the show members of the Committee shall mark
the tables with class numbers and specifications; shall direct the
exhibitors to the proper tables; see that the staging is completed
at the proper time. All exhibits receiving awards should be
conspicuously designated.

Duties of Publicity Committee

When a show has been planned articles and notices should be
given to the press from time to time. Announcements at public
meetings or at Moving Picture Theatres, as well as posters and
occasionally hand bills, are other means of publicity. Announce¬
ments of exhibitions will be included in the A. I. S. Bulletins.
Lists of winners, etc., shall immediately be sent to the press.

Suggestions to the Show Committee

An exhibit should not last over two days. Early on the second
day dead and dying flowers and stalks should be removed. Ad¬
ditional exhibits (non-competitive) may be added.

All decorations in the exhibition hall should be done well in
advance of the arrival of the exhibitors. Wherever possible a
hall should be secured that does not need artificial light in the
day time, as even the best artificial light distorts the color of
the flowers.

See that specimen stalk classes are in accord with the latest
classification of the A. I. S.

A committee to assist exhibitors in arranging their flowers
is essential.

State clearly at what hour exhibitors may begin, and must
finish, staging, and at what hour they may remove their exhibits.

State clearly at what hour the public will be admitted and at
what hour the show closes.

During the entire show an official should be at an information
desk to answer questions, whether admission is charged or not.

A. I. S. Membership Blanks and Bulletins (especially the num¬
bers on Iris culture and species) should be prominently displayed,
either on the Secretary’s desk or at a specially prepared booth or
table, where interested visitors wishing to become members of the
Society could fill out the application blank and receive informa¬
tion about the work being done by the Society.

[63]

Judges

Secure your judges early. Remember that the accredited
jud ges are busy men and women, who usually have their plans
for the season made far ahead, and that it is often impossible
to alter these plans at a late date, no matter how much they
might like to be of assistance to you.

Judging should commence punctually at the time appointed,
and the rule fixing the time for the conclusion of the staging
should be strictly enforced. In large shows the different classes
should be divided among a number of judges.

The place of exhibition should be cleared of everyone except
authorized persons before the judges begin their duties; no ex¬
ception must be made to this rule in the case of officials who are
also exhibitors. If possible, the judges should not be allowed in
the hall in advance, and should be interrupted in no way while
judging. Judging should always occur the first day immediately
after the flowers have been staged.

One to three competent judges are sufficient, although arrange¬
ment classes may be separately judged by a committee selected
for that purpose. The decisions of the judges shall be final and
they shall sign all judges’ cards.

Judges’ expenses should be paid by the local Club.

Any unusual stipulation in the schedule should be brought to
the attention of the judges.

Suggestions to Exhibitors

Note very carefully and observe strictly the conditions in the
schedule as to the time named for the judges to commence their
duties.

An exhibitor should study carefully the standards of excellence,
the rules for judging, and the wording of the classes, as the
better he appreciates the requirements the finer his exhibit. Bear
distinctly in mind that one item more, or one less, disqualifies,
and that no judge has the right himself to rectify the errors of
a competitor.

Read carefully all sections of the rules which in any way re¬
late to your proposed exhibit and, if you have any difficulty in
understanding them, write to the Secretary of the show at least
a week before it takes place.

[64 j

Each exhibitor should plan his classes and color arrangements
as he picks the flowers, labeling carefully all varieties before
packing. A friend as an assistant in the actual staging will
prove worthwhile.

Remember that the judges do not know whose exhibits they
are scoring and have no reason to judge other than on the merits
of the case.

Handling of Flowers for Exhibition

Although Irises are not easily handled as cut-flowers, prac¬
tically all winners of the past few years were the veriest ama¬
teurs in staging. Never trust your flowers to express, transport
them either by hand or by automobile. Always pack twice the
number of stalks you wish to exhibit.

One method is to pick late the previous afternoon and pack
the following morning in 8x10x48 inch boxes, across which tape
has been latticed. The stalks cut full length are laid and then
pinned in place with tape so that the flowers are held firmly,
yet well apart. In this way perfect blooms, fully blown, may
be carried, perhaps 30 to 40 to a box.

Another method is to pick rather close buds the previous
morning, tie into bunches, and place in water in a cool, dark
room until the following morning, when they are laid carefully
and tied firmly into the boxes. There is a small chance of the
flowers not opening in time to be judged.

An arrangement of chicken wire (1-inch mesh) in and over
the top of pails permits carriage of 12 to 15 stalks in full bloom
in a closed car.

Iris flowers, when cut in bud and just showing color, have
been kept in cold storage (at a temperature suited to potatoes)
as long as six weeks. The stalks are stood in shallow water in a
pail and carefully packed in moss. Often putting ice in the ex¬
hibition vase keeps the flowers in condition for a longer period.

Whatever the method, tie your stalks or bunches firmly against
the box as buds are brittle and flowers bruise easily by contact.
Transport your boxes with the utmost care and keep in mind that
an exhibit of broken flowers is worse than none.

Whenever possible, arrange your exhibits in the exhibition
room the evening before the show opens, thus allowing the buds
to open without the danger of breakage. Wilted flowers, broken

[65]

or lost petals all detract from the exhibit. In any exhibit correct
amount of material and its condition are the first points to be
considered by the judges.

Mixing large and small specimens together weakens the exhibit.

There is more honor in exhibiting well in a strongly contested
class and losing than in winning a prize with weak products in
a class in which there is little or no competition.

Suggestions to Judges

Read carefully the rules and conditions printed in the sched¬
ule and note any unusual stipulations.

Note the number of exhibitors in each class and take a general
survey of the exhibits.

Judges should be very careful not to make awards that are
not merited. If an exhibit is not up to the required standard,
the judges may “ leave a note” explaining why no award was
made. This method may help the exhibitor to do better next
time.

If the judges, being even in number, are unable to agree, they
should call in some properly qualified person to decide between
them, and at once abide by liis casting vote.

As far as possible judges should refrain from entering the
exhibition hall in which they will have to judge until tlieir official
duty actually commences.

Judges may encourage good exhibits below the prize winners
by awarding a “Highly Commended” card.

A. I. S. Medals cannot be engraved and delivered before Sep¬
tember 15tih, at the earliest. Horticultural Societies often do not
make cash payments until the following January 1st. Nursery¬
men may not deliver stock until fall. Vouchers calling for pay¬
ment in cash or stock should be signed by the local Chairman,
and if procured through the agency of the A. I. S. must also be
signed by the representative of the Society.

Suggestions drawn from your experience either as to the hand¬
ling of flowers or the management of exhibits will prove a valu¬
able and most welcome contribution to our work.

[66]

Subject to the approval of the Board of Directors, the Chair¬
man of the Exhibition Committee is empowered to accept or
refuse requests for co-operation ; to approve or disapprove
schedules and judges, and to establish such additional rules as
may be required. The Chairman will consult the Board as
required and forward proper information and authorization.

Address all communications to

Chairman of Exhibition Committee,

[67]

1934 POLICY OF AWARDS

1. The following regulations cancel all previous regulations in
reference to awards.

2. The Board of Directors shall appoint accredited judges in
various parts of the country. These judges are requested to send
reports, ratings and recommendations on new Irises to the sub¬
committee on tabulation, care of Donald B. Milliken, 970 New York
Avenue, Pasadena, California, not later than July 15th. The sub¬
committee shall tabulate the reports and furnish complete informa¬
tion to the Board of Directors on or before September 15th. In
compiling ratings, the section west of the Rocky Mountains will be
kept separate. The numerical averages wTill then be translated into
symbol letters as follows : 90 or over A ; 85 to 89 inclusive, B ; 80
to 84 inclusive, C ; 70 to 79 inclusive, D. No rating of a variety will
be published unless it has been voted on by at least five (5) judges.
It will be the policy of the Board to keep as confidential all reports
of the judges. An individual judge may, however, use his own dis¬
cretion about giving out his own ratings. The subcommittee on
tabulation shall have the power to throw out any flagrantly unjust
votes.

3. The accredited judges shall, on or before July 15th send to
the Subcommittee on tabulation their recommendations for Highly
Commended, for Honorable Mention and for Award of Merit.

4. After having seriously studied the reports of the judges, the
Board of Directors is given full power to make the Awards of Merit
without being bound to folloAV the judges’ recommendations except
as expressly designated in the following regulations:

Directions for Accredited Judges

5. In all reports judges should state approximate number of
stalks judged; whether judging was done in one or in more than
one garden ; and place or places of judging should be stated. Ob¬
viously a recommendation from a judge who has seen but one stalk
in one garden on one day cannot be given as gieat weight as a
recommendation from a judge who has seen several clumps on sev¬
eral different days in one garden or in several different gardens
and/or in widely separated places in different climatic sections.

[68 1

6. Judges are requested :

Not to vote on their own seedlings or on varieties which
they are introducing.

Not to make ratings if they see new varieties which are
plainly poorly grown or which have only been planted one
year and are not fully established.

Not to make ratings on seedlings in breeders gardens if
breeder requests that no rating be made on the variety.

Not to be too severe in any one garden if it is evident that
the growth in the whole garden is bad, or if judging takes
place too early or too late in the season, or immediately after
bad storms and unusually hot weather.

Additional Suggestions

It is requested that each judge take special pains to watch for
the following faults :

Lack of substance.

Fading of color.

Spotting from rain or dew.

Buds turning in toward stalk.

Too heavy stalk as it lack grace.

Too weak stalk tending to collapse;

Weak midrib in standard. Even in thin standard will often
hold up when supported by a heavy midrib.

Puckering and turning back of falls. Too narrow a haft.
Blooms too big or too small for the height of stalk.

Bunching of flowers at top of tall stalk and no branching
lower down.

Crowded bloom on stalk. The ideal stalk is one not too heavy,
with flowers well spaced on nice branches so that the pro¬
file of each flower may be seen distinctly.

Poor habit of growth. Plants should make regular increase,
give bloom yearly and have good foliage — at least during
the blooming season.

7. Irises which have already received awards by the American
Iris Society may be included in the list of ratings, but should not
be again recommended except for a higher award.

8. Judges may send in ratings on Irises which are not yet in
commerce and on Irises introduced during the current year or
during the two previous years.

[69]

9. Judging at Exhibitions:

Judges may make recommendation for Highly Commended:

At exhibitions in cooperation with the American Iris Society
under the following regulations :

Irises raised from seed by the exhibitor, but not introduced
to commerce. (If the originator is unable to be present he may
request another person to exhibit for him, in which case if an award
is made it will be sent to the originator instead of the exhibitor.)
From one to five flower stalks of each seedling must be shown
preferably with some of its own foliage. Judges are instructed to
give greater weight to seedlings or equal merit where more stalks
(up to the limit of five) are shown. It is recommended that no one
exhibitor should enter more than five seedlings, and it is further
requested that if possible the accredited judges do not recommend
more than five Highly Commendeds at any one show. (As the
Society does not offer prizes for seedlings, none may be offered by
individuals or clubs at any show receiving the American Iris So¬
ciety cooperation.)

The following scale of points shall be used for judging seed¬

lings at exhibitions :

Twenty-five Per Cent

Quality . 15

Condition . 10

Flower Fifty Per Cent

Color . 15

Form . 10

Substance and Texture . 10

Size according to variety . 10

Fragrance . 5

Stalk Twenty-five Per Cent

Poise and grace according to section 10
Number of blooms and buds accord¬

ing to section . 5

Height according to section . 5

Branching according to section . 5

100

10. Judging in Gardens.

Accredited judges may, alone or in groups, visit gardens and
nurseries. They may send in ratings or Irises which are not yet
in commerce and on Irises introduced during the current year or

[70]

during the two previous years. Recommendations for Honorable
Mention shall be made only to Irises not introduced or for Irises
introduced during the current year or during the two previous
years. Recommendations for Award of Merit shall be made only
to Irises officially registered and which shall have been in com¬
merce at least one and preferably two or three years AND which
have in previous years been recommended for Honorable Mention.

Recommendations for the Dykes Medal shall be made only to
Irises officially registered and which have been in commerce five
years. In 1934 this five year period shall be considered to cover
Irises introduced in 1929, in 1935 Irises introduced in 1930, etc.
Under American Iris Society rules introduction consists of pub¬
licly offering plants for sale at a stated price in a catalog or adver¬
tisement. Sales in a garden or by letter do not consist of intro¬
duction. As the Dykes Medal has already been given to a 1929
variety, the Board of Directors lias voted not to make this award
in 1934.

All the above are for Irises originating in America.

Judges may also recommend Awards of Merit for any foreign
Irises introduced during the past five years (in 1934 this would
mean introduction of and since 1929.)

11. All judges are expected to use the following scale of points
for judging in gardens:

I COLOR

(a) Clarity . 10

(b) Brilliancy . 7

(d) Novelty . 3

II QUALITY

III GARDEN VALUE

(a) Substance .

,(b) Texture .

(d) Fragrance .

(a) Massing .

,(b) Carrying quality .

IV FORM .

V VIGOR .

VI FLORIFEROUSNESS
VII STALK .

7
5

5 >

100

[71]

12. Definitions

1. Color

(a) Clarity: A clear rather than a muddy color. Even
in blends the combination should be of clear colors.

(b) Brilliancy : A brilliance of color that makes the
flower outstanding among others of similar type.

Or Delicacy: Delicate or ethereal quality of color.

(d) Novelty: A distinct or novel color not hitherto well
known in Iris.

2. Quality

(a) Substance: Thickness of petals which give flower
rigidity and poise.

(b) Texture: Surface appearance of parts of the flower.

(c) Weather Resistance : Having that quality that en¬
ables the flower to withstand the vicissitudes of
weather, hot scorching sun, thunderstorms, winds,
etc.

(cl) Fragrance : A pleasing perfume.

3. Garden Value

(a) Massing: Giving a pleasing appearance when a num¬
ber of plants are planted in a mass. Enough flowers
should be open at one time and they should not be
too crowded.

(b) Carrying Quality: Color bright enough to be effec¬
tive at distance. That quality that makes the variety
stand out in the average garden.

4. Form: Proportion and shape of flowers as a whole. A
harmonious and well-balanced flower is desirable.

5. Vigor: Hardiness (according to climate). Strength of
growth and reasonably rapid increase. Resistance to dis¬
ease. Foliage should be healthy color and in size and
keeping with plant as a whole.

6. Floriferousness: Free and reliable bloomers with many
stalks of flowers. Not apt to be shy bloomers in unfavor¬
able seasons.

[72]

7. Stalk

(a) Poise: The judge must consider whether the stalk is
attractive as a whole, including sufficient strength to
prevent necessity of staking under ordinary circum¬
stances.

(b) Grace: It is desirable that stalks while strong should
not be too coarse, or too slender, too heavy or too
rigid for pleasing appearance. Under this heading
should be considered also height and weight of stalk
in relation to size and number of flowers.

(c) Placing: This refers to position of branches. It is
desirable that the branches be pleasingly placed along
the stalk instead of being too much bunched at the
top.

Note : — These Standards of Excellence can be applied to all types
of Irises if due allowance is made for the variations char¬
acteristic of the respective sections.

In order to facilitate the work of tabulation, all judges are
requested to make all their returns on the uniform loose leaf forms
which are furnished to them.

Directions for Board of Directors

13. Highly Commended

The Board of Directors shall give Highly Commended to
varieties receiving three or more recommendations from the
accredited judges subject to the regulations in paragraph
9 above.

14. Honorable Mention

The Board of Directors shall give Honorable Mention to
varieties receiving five or more recommendations from the
accredited judges and subject to the regulations in para¬
graph 10 above.

15. Award of Merit

The Board of Directors may give not more than five Amer¬
ican Awards of Merit yearly. Such awards shall be given
only upon the recommendation of at least seven accredited
judges, and subject to the regulations in paragraph 10 above.
Such award shall not be given an Iris which all or most of
the judges saw in the same garden and preference shall be
given to those seen in widely scattered sections.

[73 1

16. Dyk es Memorial Medal

Tlie Iris Society of England lias offered to the American
Iris Society the Dykes Memorial Medal yearly. This is the
highest award that can be given to a new Iris. Upon the
recommendation of seven or more accredited judges and
subject to the regulations in paragraph 10 above, the Com¬
mittee on Awards may award this medal yearly subject to
the confirmation of the Board of Directors. The medal
should go to an Iris widely distributed and judged in
widely scattered sections. As stated above this medal will
not be awarded in 1934.

All of the above refers to Iris originated in America. In addi¬
tion the Board of Directors may give not more than five Awards
of Merit yearly to Irises of foreign origin. Such awards shall be
given only upon the recommendation of at least seven accredited
judges and subject to the regulations in paragraph 10 above.

Accredited judges should send all ratings and recommenda¬
tions to

Donald B. Milliken,

970 New York Avenue,

Pasadena, California

on or before July 15th.

[74]

MEMBERSHIP LIST, OCTOBER 1, 1934

Members have been listed by States, grouped within the States
by an alphabetical arrangement of cities, and if one or more
members live in the same city, they too are listed in alphabetical
order. This arrangement gives the reader the advantage of
knowing how many members may be found in any particular
locality.

The date before the name gives the year of joining as in our
records. If there are errors here, please report to the Secretary.
H indicates Honorary members; C, Charter members, 1920;
L, Life members.

ALABAMA

1931 — Wm. F. Cahoon, 1140 11th Ave., So. Birmingham
1921 — Samuel L. Earle, 1223 Niazuma Ave., Birmingham
1934 — Mrs. R. M. Goodall, Sr., 17 Glen Iris Park, Birmingham
1934 — William J. Rushton, Box 1751, Birmingham

1933 — Mrs. Oscar G. Thurlow, Box 440, Route 2, Birmingham

1934 — Mrs. H. M. Sallee, Letohatchee

1931- — Mr. George B. Rogers, 1213 Selma St., Mobile
1934 — Dr. J. L. Bowman, City Building, Montgomery
1934- — Mrs. George F. Scruggs, 500 Lauderdale St., Selma

ARKANSAS

1931 — Mrs. J. M. Baker, Cedar Lodge, Berryville
1934 — Joseph B. Youmans, Emmet

1934 — Mr. Fred B. Smith, 140 Booker St., Little Rock
1934 — Mr. J. C. Rose, Route 4, Russellville

CALIFORNIA

L — Mrs. Anson S. Blake, Arlington & Rincon Sts., Berkeley
1923— Prof. E. O. Essig, 910 Hilldale Ave., Berkeley
L — Sydney B. Mitchell, 633 Woodmont Ave., Berkeley
1925 — Mr. Carl Salbach, 657 Woodmont Ave., Berkeley
University of California, Berkeley
1934 — Mr. Basil D. Miller, 180 K St., Chula ATista

1932 — Mr. John A. Monroe, 730 Fourth Ave., Chula Vista

1932- — Mr. Frank R. Reinelt, Capitola

1932— Library Branch of the College of Agriculture, Davis
1934 — Mrs. George T. Goodhue, Route 2, Box 733, Fresno

1933 — Mr. W. H. Kingsley, Eden Gladiolus Gardens, Hayward

1934 — Mrs. Emma Gobbi, Route 3, Box 114, Healdsburg
1934 — Mr. Willard Wehmueller, Box 80, Hollister

1927- — Lorraine Cerf, Holt, San Joaquin County.

1925 — Elizabeth Hardee Iris Gardens, Kentfield

1931 — Germain Seed and Plant Company, Arcade Station P. O., Los Angeles

1933 — Dr. Eric E. Nies, 1423 N. Kingsley Drive, Los Angeles

[75]

1933 — Mrs. Henry F. Prince, 753 S. Oxford Ave., Los Angeles

1930 — Mrs. L. E. Perkins, 175 N. Magnolia Ave., Monrovia
1925 — Mrs. C. S. Goodman, 1915 Tenth Ave., Oakland

1934 — Mrs. Knssell D. Dysart, 134 Princeton St., Ontario

1931 — Stanley Forbes, 1151 University Ave., Palo Alto

1934 — Mr. Donald B. Milliken, Southern California Iris Gardens, 970 New
York Ave., Pasadena

1927 — Mr. Eobert T. Moore, Koute 1, Box 28-A, Pasadena
1931 — Mr. F. E. Eeibold, 1395 Linda Vista Ave., Pasadena

1924 — Frank F. Williams, Jr., M. D., 7 Centre Drive, Patton

L — Mr. Clarence G. White, Sunset Drive at Mariposa, Eedlands
1921 — Miss Meda Hinckley, Eoute 2, Box 288, Eedlands

1933 — Mr. Albert P. Vanselow, 4(307 Eubidoux Ave., Eiverside

1931 — Mrs. G. G. Pollock, 1341 45th St., Sacramento

1932 — Mr. C. M. Troxel, 31G1 Y St., Sacramento

1927 — Mrs. Lena M. Lothrop, 826 D St., San Bernardino

1934 — Mrs. Florence P. Brant, 4054 Florida St., San Diego

1927 — San Diego Floral Association, Box 323, San Diego
1934 — F. G. Weisman, 1487 17th Ave., San Francisco

1928— Miss Euth Eees, 1059 Bird Ave., San Jose

1921 — Mrs. Jemima Branin, Box 562, San Lorenzo, Alameda County

1927 — Mrs. Beatrix Farrand, 1650 Orlando Eoad, San Marino
L — James B. Smith, El Nido, Burlingame, San Mateo

1931 — C. E. Lehman, Box 83, Santa Eosa
1934 — Miss Arlen Luvano, Springville

L — James M. Perry, Star Eoute, Upper Lake

1933 — Mrs. Louis F. Vaile, Vacaville

1925 — Mrs. A. B. Welch, Woodland

COLOEADO

C — Mr. D. M. Andrews, Box 493, Boulder
1925 — Mrs. Edw. L. Kernochan, 1926 Wood Ave., Colorado Springs

1930 — K. N. Marriage, Upton Gardens, Colorado Springs
1923 — Dr. P. A. Loomis, 1414 Culebra Ave., Colorado Springs

1934 — P. H. Graham, 1730 Glencoe Ave., Denver
1934 — Miss Florence A. Wilkins, Walden

CONNECTICUT

1931 — F. S. McDaniel, Box 1032, Bridgeport
1925 — Mrs. William Bassett, Cheshire

L — Carl Oscar Carlson, Fairchild

1928 — Mrs. William Darrach, Box 622, Greenwich

1923 — Mrs. Walter Pierson, Buccleuch, North St., Greenwich
L — Mrs. Z. G. Simmons, Clapboard Bidge Eoad, Greenwich
1920 — Mr. George E. Goodwin, 181 Elizabeth St., Hartford
1931 — Mr. E. A. Piester, Dept, of Parks, Municipal Bldg., Hartford
C — Miss Frances E. Ives, 391 Broad Street, Meriden

1927 — Mrs. Charles S. Myers, Box 83, Naugatuck

1928 — Miss Euth M. Adt, Box 81, Westville Station, New Haven

[ 76]

1927 — Garden Club of New Haven, Mrs. R. W. Tuttle, Treasurer, 161

Linden St., New Haven

C — Mrs. E. H. Jenkins, 108 E. Rock Road, New Haven

1928 — Marsh Botanical Garden, Prof. G. E. Nichols, Yale University,

New Haven.

L — John B. Wallace, Jr., 129 Church St., New Haven
1931 — Mrs. Julia C. Wallace, 436 Prospect St., New Haven
1927 — Ralph G. Van Name, 168 Prospect Street, New Haven
L — Miss Theodore Van Name, 60 Lincoln St., New Haven
1931 — Connecticut College, Department of Botany, New London
C — Mrs. Colin M. Ingersoll, Evergreen Farm, Salisbury

1927 — Roland M. Patch, Connecticut Agricultural College, Storrs
1934 — Willard M. Kellogg, 60 N. Main St., West Hartford
1925 — Mrs. Louise M. Kellogg, 60 Main St., West Hartford

C — Mrs. E. W. Abrams, Old Place, Woodbury
1933— Mr. Carl W. Clark, Woodbridge

DELAWARE

1931 — Mrs. F. W. Pickard, Old Mill Road, Greenville
1921 — Mrs. E. Paul duPont, Squirrel Run Hill, Montchanin

1933 — Mrs. Donald P. Ross, Montchanin

L — Mrs. H. Fletcher Brown, 1010 Broome St., Wilmington
L — Mrs. C. Douglas Buck, Buena Vista, Wilmington
L — Mrs. W. K. duPont, Box 52, Wilmington

1934 — Mrs. Leslie P. Mahoney, 2201 Gilpin Ave., Wilmington
L — Mrs. W. C. Spruance, 2507 W. 17th St., Wilmington

L — II. F. duPont, Winterthur

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
C — B. Y. Morrison, Takoma Park, D. C.

1933 — Mr. R. II. Burtner, 2223 Douglas St., Washington

C — Mrs. Theodore Irving Coe, 4000 Cathedral Ave., Washington
1921 — -Mr. Chas. E. F. Gersdorff, 1825 North Capitol St., Washington
C — Dr. David Griffiths, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington
1925 — Bernard H. Lane, 5327 Conduit Road, Washington

1928- — U. S. Department of Agriculture, Library, Washington

Mrs. T. H. B. McKnight, 1615 21st St., N. W., Washington
1931 — Mr. J. E. Parker, 1217 Lawrence St., N. E., Washington
1928 — Mrs. George W. II. Soellner, 3436 17th St., N. W., Washington

1934 — Mrs. Thorne Strayer, 2837 29th St., N. W., Washington

FLORIDA

L — Mrs. Claud Meeker, Nelmar and Magnolia Aves., St. Augustine

GEORGIA

1931 — University of Georgia, General Library, Athens
1930 — Mrs. James R. Bachman, 2646 Alston Drive, Atlanta
1934 — Mrs. Fred F. Creswell, Route No. 6, Roswell Road, Atlanta
1933 — Dr. L. C. Fischer, 35 Linden Ave., N. E., Atlanta

1930 — Mrs. A. T. Harris, 1509 Ponce de Leon Ave., N. E., Atlanta

1931— Mrs. Arnold Hepp, 1110 Club Lane, Atlanta

[77]

1933 — Miss May Hudson, 1474 Peachtree St., N. W., Atlanta

1934 — Iris Garden Club, Mrs. Bolling Sassnett, Pres., 1708 Peachtree St.,

Atlanta

1933 — Mrs. Richard W. Johnston, 5 Wesley Road, W., Atlanta

1934 — Mrs. Robert Campbell, Route No. 2, Cave Spring
1934 — Mrs. George P. Estes, 00 Green Street, Gainsville
1934 — Mrs. E. F. Carlisle, 525 S. Ilill St., Griffin

1934 — Mrs. Cooper Newton, 204 W. College St., Griffin
1934 — Mrs. J. C. Alexander, Jefferson
1934 — Mrs. D. P. Few, Madison

1928— Mr. Sam L. Graham, Superior and City Courts, Rome

1930 — Mrs. John Lewis Kilgore, Route No. 1, Box 37-A, Stone Mountain

IDAHO

1932 — Mr. Stanley C. Clarke, School of Forestry, University of Idaho,
Moscow

1930 — J. II. Christ, Supt., Experiment Sta., University of Idaho, Sandpoint

ILLINOIS

1934 — Mrs. II. L. Medbery, Armington

1927 — Mrs. George R. Charters, Ashton

L — Miss Harriet F. Holmes, S. Batavia Road, Batavia
C — Mrs. Azro Fellows, 321 N. State St., Belvidere

1926 — Mrs. Lelia M. Bach, 1111 E. Grove St., Bloomington

1932 — Mr. C. II. Baumgart, 2002 E. Jackson St., Bloomington

1928 — W. B. Otwell, Carlinville

1928 — Mrs. E. J. Townsend, 510 E. John Street, Champaign
1934 — Robert G. Buzzard, Eastern Ill. State Teachers College, Charleston
1922 — Mr. Sherman Duffy, The Chicago American , 326 W. Madison St.,
Chicago

1931 — Mrs. A. L. Farwell, 1301 Ritchie Court, Chicago

1931 — Mr. David F. Hall, Amer. Telephone & Telegraph Co., 311 W.

Washington St., Chicago

1933 — Mrs. Frank C. Lambert, 2445 Iowa St., Chicago

1933 — Mrs. Katherine Iv. Perrigo, 3931 N. Hamlin Ave., Chicago

1934 — Mr. Norman Schwennesen, 4243 N. Damen Ave., Chicago

1927 — Mrs. C. A. Shull, 5605 Drexel Ave., Chicago

1925 — Vaughans Seed Store, 601 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago
C — Mr. J. Roy West, 1101 Buena Ave., Chicago

1933 — Dr. A. C. Wilhelm, 3040 N. Mansfield Ave., Chicago

1934 — George G. Zink, 8163 Cornell Ave., Chicago

1934 — Miss Mildred E. Manuel, Rand Road, R. No. 2, Box 27-A, Des
Plaines

1933 — Mrs. C. R. Walgren, Dixon

1925 — Mr. Josiah Whitnel, 505-11 First National Bank Bldg., East St.
Louis

1934 — Dr. Franklin J. Cook, 2131 Orrington Ave., Evanston

1928 — Mrs. John R. Guilliams, 2423 Harrison St., Evanston

1932 — Mrs. Fred P. Vose, 1131 Ridge Ave., Evanston

[ 78]

1931 — Garden Club of Evanston, 1512 Ashbury Ave., Evanston

1923 — Mrs. W. L. Karcher, 1011 W. Stephenson St., Freeport

1924 — Mrs. Douglas Pattison, 871 W. Stephenson St., Freeport

1925 — P. L. Battey, Prop., Northbrook Gardens, Glencoe

1928 — Mrs. Fred H. Glutton, 589 Kimball Road, Highland Park
1934 — Mrs. Roy A. Grossman, 712 Yale Lane, Highland Park
1933 — Mrs. Leroy F. Harza, 2299 Pierce Road, Highland Park
1933 — Mrs. O. W. Dynes, 318 N. Madison St., Hinsdale
1928 — Euclid Snow, R. F. D. No. 2, Clarenden Hills, Hinsdale
L— Mrs. Walter S. Brewster, Covin Tree, Lake Forest
1928 — Inez Douglas, 910 N. Green Bay Road, Lake Forest
Morton Arboretum, Lisle

1925 — Mr. Hubert A. Fischer, 332 S. Grace St., Lombard

1931 — Mrs. Thomas II. Slusser, 5835 East Circle Ave., Norwood Park

1931 — Ray J. Belsley, 2417 Seventh Ave., Peoria
1922 — Mr. M. H. Scott, Piper City

C — Arthur Bryant & Son, Princeton

1924 — Edward Auten, Jr., Princeville, Peoria County

1932 — Richard Goodman, 253 Bloomingbank Road, Riverside
1928 — Mrs. Frank II. Landon, 180 Herrick Road, Riverside
1921 — G. J. Boehland, Coreys Bluff, Rockford

1931 — Mr. William R. Jack, 205 AV. Pine St., Springfield

1930 — Mrs. Lindsay R. Hahn, 2617 S. 11th St., Springfield

1933 — Mrs. Louise Shepard Pittman, Streator

1934 — Mrs. E. F. Plumb, 321 Main St., Streator

1933 — Mr. M. F. Michels, 108 N. Sheridan Road, Waukegan

1932 — Mr. Horace G. Reed, Box 304, Waukegan

1934 — Mrs. Hans Herbert Gugler, 719 Naperville Road, Wheaton

INDIANA

1927 — Alfred C. Kinsey, Indiana University, Bloomington
C— Mr. Paul II. Cook, Bluffton

1931— Miss Mary Williamson, The Longfield Iris Farms, Bluffton
1921 — Joseph R. Harrison, Columbia City

1927 — Mrs. Norman S. Horton, 1233 N. Main St., Elkhart

1925 — E. G. Lapham, 1003 Strong Ave., Elkhart

1933 — Mr. John C. Rheinhardt, 2006 Fifth Ave., Evansville

1934 — Mr. Earl E. Stevens, 2501 Oakridge Road, Ft. Wayne
1931 — J. M. E. Riedel, 542 E. State Blvd., Ft. Wayne

1928 — Miss Mary Rankin, 514 N. East St., Greensburg

1931 — Clyde M. Bower, 3305 AAG Washington St., Indianapolis
1925 — Mr. Orville de Motte, 5526 N. Penn St., Indianapolis
C — Margaret L. Griffith, 335 Burgess Ave., Indianapolis
1920— Mrs. Charles J. Lynn, 5600 Sunset Lane, Indianapolis
1931 — A. W. R. MacKenzie, Route No. 13, Box 97, Indianapolis
C — Mr. Lorenz G. Schumm, 302 C St., La Porte
1927 — G. A. Young, Purdue University, Lafayette

1934 — Mr. W. A. Aeppli, International Black Minorca Club, Plymouth
1931 — Mrs. J. M. Richer, South Whitley

[79]

1933 — Miles G. O’Neall, Washington

1934— Mrs. F. W. Sullivan, Jr., 1542 Amy Avenue, Whiting

IOWA

1931 — Miss Hazel N. Chapman, Bagley

1928 — Mrs. L. W. Butterfield, 2234 Upland Drive, Cedar Rapids
C — -Miss Anna Karka, 1245 First Ave., S. E., Cedar Rapids
1934— Mr. Arthur E. Smith, 1737 18th St., Cedar Rapids
1934 — Mr. Frank Svee, 1021 1st St., Cedar Rapids
1928 — Mrs. Jessie F. Shambaugh, Clarinda
1934— Mrs. M. A. Tinley, 520 3rd St., Council Bluffs
1931 — Roy B. Barquist, 716 19th St., Des Moines
C— Mrs. W. G. DuMont, 306 51st St., Des Moines
1931 — Mr. Alfred C. Hottes, Meredith Publishing Company, Des Moines

1930 — Carl Singmaster, Sunny Place Gardens, 1703 Tichenor St., Des

Moines

1933 — Mr. John T. Ivahle, 1965 Alta Yista, Dubuque

1933 — Mr. B. B. Brown, 2004 N. Main St.., Hamburg

1934 — Interstate Nurseries, Hamburg
1928 — Rouze Hunter, Knoxville

1934 — Mr. W. J. Brucher, Le Mars

1931 — C. G. Whiting, Mapleton Trust & Savings Bank, Mapleton

1931— Miss Minnie Koeper, Route No. 4, Marshalltown
1930 — Prof. W. H. Norton, Cornell College, Mt. Vernon
1934 — Mr. D. W. Hall, 723 5th St., Perry

1932 — Mrs. E. C. Currier, 2115 Summit Ave., Sioux City

1932 — Mr. Edward Gallagher, 2301 E. 8th St., Sioux City
1934 — Mrs. D. W. McAhren, 2916 Jones St., Sioux City

1933 — Mrs. Ralph E. Ricker, 1516 Rose St., Sioux City
1927- — W. S. Snyder, 3822 4th Ave., Sioux City

1934 — B. N. Stephenson, 3600 6th Ave., Sioux City

KANSAS

1934 — Mr. Josie Eresch, Beloit

1932 — Mr. Melven G. Geiser, Fair Chance Farm, Beloit

1925 — E. F. Valentine, Clay Center

1927 — Mrs. H. W. Manning, 1420 Rural St., Emporia

1921— Walter Timmerman, 2017 Freeman Ave., Kansas City

1926 — Howard M. Hill, Lafontaine

1934 — Mrs. Frank E. Jones, 1140 E. 13th St., Lawrence

1926 — Mrs. Walter V. Thomas, Bird Haven Iris Gardens, 722 S. Broad¬
way, Leavenworth

1922 — Mr. R. A. Seaton, Kansas State Agricultural College, Manhattan
C — Percy W. Smith, Route No. 2, Overland Park

1930 — The Iris Garden, Miss Dorothy Stoner, Route No. 2, Overland Park
1934 — Mrs. Lyndon F. Day, 1257 Garfield Ave., Topeka

1926 — W. A. Harshberger, 1401 College Ave., Topeka

1925 — Dr. C. F. Menninger, Route No. 4, Oakwood Peony Farm, Topeka

1931 — A. H. Covert, 1351 S. Hydraulic Ave., Wichita

[80]

1932 — Wichita Garden Club, Mrs. Edward R. Gruger, Secretary, 420 N.

Pershing Ave., Wichita

1933 — Mrs. C. L. Henderson, 338 N. Quentin Ave., Wichita

1933 — Linwood Iris Garden, Blanche Covert, 1351 S. Hydraulic Ave., Wichita

KENTUCKY

1926— R. K. McClure, Jr., 319 Washington St., Frankfort
1923 — Mrs. J. L. Dodge, Hollywood Farm, Lexington
1921 — Mrs. Boyce W. Fontaine, Iron Works Road, Lexington

1925 — Miss Daisy Flume, Winchester Road, Lexington

1926 — Dr. John W. Scott, 328 N. Limestone, Lexington
1921 — Mrs. Temple Bodley, 422 W. Oak St., Louisville

1926 — W. R. Cobb, Route No. 1, Box 318, Louisville

1930 — Frank M. Drake, 1017 Kentucky Home Life Bldg., Louisville
1928 — Mrs. Clarence R. Gertner, Terrace Hill Gardens, 1525 S. Preston
St., Louisville

1927 — Dr. Henry Lee Grant, 810 Starks Bldg., Louisville

1933 — Carl Carpenter, 221 E. 4th St., Owensboro

1934 — Samuel H. Morton, 1405 W. 2nd St., Owensboro

1933 — Mrs. A. R. Meyers, 228 N. 9th St., Paducah

LOUISIANA

1934 — Mr. Edward A. Mcllhenny, Avery Island

MAINE

C — Prof. Manton Copeland, 88 Federal St., Brunswick
L — Mr. Philip Meserve, 79 Federal St., Brunswick
1933 — Leon F. Bryant, Cobb Road, Camden

L — Mr. Walter E. Tobie, 3 Peering St., Portland

1927- — Miss Rita C. Smith, 163 Main St., Thomaston

MARYLAND

1930 — Mr. G. R. Clements, 7 Thompson St., Annapolis
C — J. Marion Shull, 207 Raymond St., Chevy Chase

1932 — Mr. Howard R. Watkins, 308 Cumberland Ave., Chevy Chase
1930 — M. B. Doub, Hearthstone Farm, Route No. 4, Hagerstown

1933 — Mr. J. C. Somers, 5515 Edna Ave., Hamilton P. O., Balto. County
1933 — Mr. H. H. Harned, 34 Green St., Oakland

1930 — M. B. Waite, R. F. D. No. 1, Odenton

1933 — Mrs. W. H. Haydon, Riderwood, Baltimore County

1934 — Mrs. Charles W. Ayers, 217 Maple Ave., Takoma Park

1930 — Mrs. Frank Gould, Locust Yale, Towson
C — Mrs. John Love, Towson

1931 — Mr. W. J. Puffer, 242 Bristol Road, Webster Groves
1927 — Mrs. E. J. Reid, Welbourne

MASSACHUSETTS

1933 — Mrs. H. A. Phinney, 83 Gray St., Arlington
1931 — -Mr. Eugene O. Parsons, 6 Leicester St., Auburn
1931 — Harold W. Knowlton, 32 Hancock St., Auburndale
1931 — Dr. G. Percy Brown, Barre

[81]

1924 — Dr. Edgar Anderson, Arnold Aboretum, Jamaica Plain, Boston
E — Mr. E. B. Dane, 6 Beacon St., Boston

1927- — Mr. E. I. Farrington, Editor Horticulture, 300 Massachusetts Ave.,

Boston

C — H. C. Goehl, 26 Myrtle St., Jamaica Plain, Boston
1926 — Mrs. Edward W. Hutchins, 166 Beacon St., Boston
C — Mr. Robert T. Jackson, 20 Lime St., Boston

1928 — Robert T. Paine, 10 State St., Boston

C — Miss Amelia Peabody, 120 Commonwealth Ave., Boston
C — F. T. Pratt, 200 Devonshire St., Boston
1934 — Dr. George R. Minot, 71 Sears Road, Brookline

1931 — Olmsted Brothers, 99 Warren St., Brookline

L — Dr. Harris Kennedy, Gray Herbarium, 79 Garden St., Cambridge
L — Miss Mildred A. Miller, 148 Hancock St., Cambridge
L — Mrs. Ernest B. Dane, Roughwood, Chestnut Hill
C — Mrs. Clement S. Houghton, 152 Suffolk Road, Chestnut Hill

1925 — Mrs. B. Preston Clark, 171 Marlborough St., Cohasset

1925 — Mr. Charles Huntington Smith, Deerfield

1933 — Miss Allie W. Omey, 13 Cherry St., Fairhaven

1928 — Mrs. Thomas H. Blodgett, Great Pine Farm, Great Barrington
L-C- — Robert S. Sturtevant, Groton

1930— Park Department, City Hall, City of Haverhill, Haverhill
L — Mrs. Herman E. Lewis, 180 Grove St., Haverhill

1921 — Mr. Herman E. Lewis, 180 Grove St., Haverhill
L — Dr. A. C. Bagg, 72 Fairfield Ave., Holyoke

1926 — Mrs. W. A. Prentiss, 1399 Northampton St., Holyoke
L — Stephen F. Hamblin, 45 Parker St., Lexington

1934 — Mr. Charles D. Leonard, 753 Waltham St., Lexington

1927 — Mrs. P. E. Raymond, 23 Revere St., Lexington

L — Mrs. Thomas Nesmith, 166 Fairmount St., Lowell
1934 — Mrs. Harry K. Gardiner, 26 Brookhouse Drive, Marblehead

1932 — Mrs. Florence C. Murray, 31 Geneva Road, Melrose

1933 — Asher P. Balcom, 57 Washington St., Natick
1926 — L. Merton Gage, Sunnyside Gardens, Natick

1931 — Mrs. Francis V. Crane, South St., Needham

1931 — George H. Bliss, 96 Lime St., Newburyport
1933 — Mrs. F. P. Lowry, 62 Walnut Park, Newton

1932 — Mr. Arthur II. Fewkes, 120 Hyde St., Newton Highlands

C — T. F. Donahue, 2352 Washington St., Newton Lower Falls

1928 — Mrs. L. A. Frothingham, North Easton
1931 — Mrs. William F. Baker, Vernon St., Norwood

1933 — Mr. Robert Gow, 331 South St., Oxford

1934 — Henry Jewett Greene, Petersham

1931 — Mrs. Harry Webster Searles, 2 Holmes Terrace, Plymouth
C — Mrs. Wm. E. Clark, Sunnymede, Sharon
1926 — Rev. Edw. K. Thurlow, Christ Church, Sheffield
1931 — Mr. Arthur Hadley, 46 Pearl St., Somerville
1928 — Miss II. C. MacLaren, S. Egremont

[82]

1930— Robert C. Foster, 43 Kenwood Park, Springfield
1928 — Mrs. Gurdon W. Gordon, 90 Dartmouth St., Springfield

C — -William B. Ivirkman, 275 Maple St., Springfield

1926 — Springfield Park Department, Springfield
1934 — Mrs. Bernard Hoffman, Brookside, Stockbridge
1926 — Mrs. Gertrude W. Phillips, 7 Sheridan Road, Swampscott

1925 — -Mrs. Gertrude I. Titus, 17 Sheridan Road, Swampscott
1923 — Mr. Ralph C. Bean, 48 Emerson St., Wakefield

L-C — Miss Grace Sturtevant, Wellesley Farms
1933 — Mr. Roland A. Parker, West Boylston
L — Miss M. R. Case, Ilillcrest Farm, Weston
L — -Mrs. Liiulsley Loring, Westwood

C — Mrs. Percy G. Browne, 301 S. Washington St., Whitman
1933 — Mrs. Bessie G. Conant, 696 Washington St., Whitman

1921 — Mrs. Robert C. Allen, 19 Metcalf St., Worcester

1933 — Miss Gladys A. Durkee, 27 Mountain St., W., Worcester
L — Mrs. Homer Gage, 8 Chestnut St., Worcester

1923 — -W. J. McKee, 48 Kenwood Ave., Worcester

MICHIGAN

1922 — II. A. Fee, 411 S. Main St., Adrian

1928 — Mrs. Sam Burchfield, Huron Valley Iris Gardens, Ann Arbor
C — A. E. Greene, 415 E. William St., Ann Arbor

1934 — Mr. Marley P. Williams, 1011 E. University Ave., Ann Arbor

1931— Mrs. L. C. Thielk, 1435 Rosewood, Ann Arbor

1924 — Mr. R. V. Ashley, 172 Grand Blvd., Battle Creek

1931 — A. F. Bloese, 128 Roseneath, Battle Creek
1934 — W. F. Benning, Route No. 4, Benton Harbor

1933 — Miss Addie Sly, Sly Fruit Farm, Maple Road, Birmingham

1934 — Walter Riemenschneider, R. F. D. No. 1, Chelsea

1921 — Hugh Ledyard, 35 Cloverly Road, Grosse Pointe Farms

1926 — Charles IJ. Bear, 654 Putnam Ave., Detroit

1933 — Mr. J. C. Mulkey, 17664 Pierson Ave., Detroit

1932— Mrs. Hoyt Nissley, 142 Puritan Ave., Detroit

1934 — Mrs. E. M. Olsen, 2016 Ash St., Detroit

1922 — -Mrs. F. W. Robinson, 390 E. Grand Blvd., Detroit

1927 — James A. Smith, Jr., 150 Webb Ave., Detroit

1928 — Mrs. A. N. Larsen, Fennville

1934 — Mrs. L. D. Englerth, 4652 Division Ave., South, Grand Rapids

1934 — Mrs. B. H. Shepard, 418 E. King St., Lowell

1922 — Mr. Will M. McClelland, 419 N. Jefferson St., Saginaw

MINNESOTA

1926 — Mrs. M. F. Bates, 317 E. 4th St., Duluth

1931 — Duluth Peony & Iris Society, Joseph M. Sellwood, See’y-> Duluth

1934 — Mrs. J. J. Joyce, 2727 E. Fifth St., Duluth

1934 — Mrs. J. F. Thompson, 529 Woodland Ave., Duluth

1931 — A. S. Avery, Box 131, Hutchinson

1934 — Mrs. Charles K. Velie, Far View, Long Lake

[ 83 ]

1933 — Mr. C. 11. Brackett, 310 Foshay Tower, Minneapolis
1928 — L. W. Lindgren, 1787 W. Minnehaha St., St. Paul

1931 — Robert V. Schreiner, Schreiner’s Iris Garden, Riverview Station,

St. Paul

1932 — Mr. J. C. White, R. F. D. No. 1, Box 23, South Haven

MISSISSIPPI

1932— Mrs. H. M. Waddell, Clarksdale

1934 — Mr. M. F. Rubel, President, Boy Scouts Nursery, Corinth

1933— Dr. W. A. Percy, Percy Strauss & Kellner, Greenville

MISSOURI

1931 — Mrs. E. G. Johnson, 234 Lockling Ave., Brookfield

1934 — Mrs. Emilia D. Onsdorff, Bucklin

1931 — Mrs. O. K. Bovard, Conway & Balias Roads, R. F. D. No. 3, Box

554, Clayton

1934 — M. P. Burroughs, Route No. 2, Box 1017, Pike Road, Clayton
1928 — Mrs. I. A. Stevens, Clayton and Conway Roads, Clayton
1934 — Mr. Daniel E. Beebe, Hickman Mills

1925 — J. H. Grinter, 737 S. Main St., Independence

1928 — Mr. Joseph M. Branson, 4141 Terrace St., Kansas City

1933 — 'Mrs. J. F. Huckle, 3737 Gillham Road, Kansas City
1928 — George Graham, 620 N. Taylor Ave., Kirkwood
1928 — Bruce C. Maples, Maples’ Gardens, Ozark

1932 — Mrs. Annie E. Howard, Republic

1931 — Mrs. W. W. Holliway, Holliway Lumber Company, Rockport

1934 — Mr. R. E. Borene, 40th and Doniphan Ave., St. Joseph
1934 — Mr. E. A. Byous, 817 Garden St., St. Joseph

1933 — Mrs. Ella W. Callis, Wild Rose Iris Gardens, Route 5, St. Joseph

1934 — Mrs. Frank H. Conner, 405 Highland Ave., St. Joseph

1931 — O. J. McBride, 2208 Angelique St., St. Joseph

1932 — Mr. Carl O. Schirmer, 6106 King Hill Ave., St. Joseph

1926 — F. J. Boehm, 315 N. 12th St., St. Louis

Farr Memorial Library, Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis
C — Mr. Henry J. Gerling, 3632 Lafayette Ave., St. Louis

1932 — Mrs. Richard G. Ilager, 3443 Hawthorne Place, St. Louis
1928 — Paul A. Kohl, Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis

C — Missouri Botanical Garden, 2315 Tower Grove Ave., St. Louis
L — Dr. George T. Moore, Missouri Botanical Garden, 2315 Tower
Grove Ave., St. Louis

1932 — Joseph F. Wiesner, 7475 Warner Ave., St. Louis

MONTANA

1934 — Mr. C. C. Bever, 310 N. 29th St., Billings

1930 — Montana State College, Horticultural Department, Bozeman

NEBRASKA

1933 — Mrs. J. M. Kilpatrick, 1100 Jackson St., Beatrice

1927 — J. B. Bratt, Bennet

1933— Mrs. Harvey M. Hudson, Humboldt

[84]

1934 — Miss Margerie Bernstein, 2433 Washington St., Lincoln
1928 — W. H. Dunman, Agricultural College, Lincoln

1925 — Harry H. Everett, M. D., 2433 Woodcrest, Lincoln

1933 — Mr. G. H. Graham, 4410 Judson St., Lincoln

1934 — Mrs. Charles Jordan, Route No. 10, Lincoln
1934 — J. H. Kitchen, Route No. 2, Box 94, Lincoln

1932 — Mrs. A. C. Nelson, 2056 S. 18th St., Lincoln

1933 — Mrs. C. B. Towle, 1800 E St., Lincoln

1932 — Adah Tucker, 730 S. 14th St., Lincoln

1934 — W. W. Yocum, 3218 Dudley St., Lincoln
1934 — Mrs. Gus Houfek, Malmo

1927 — Mrs. Mabel Wernimont, Fillmore Gardens, Oiliowa

1934 — Mrs. Fred F. Grauseman, Box 62, Florence Station, Omaha

1922 — Howard T. R. Judson, Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co., 14th and Jones

Sts., Omaha.

1926 — Mrs. A. D. Mallory, 5013 Cumins St., Omaha

C — Mr. Jacob Sass, Maple Road Gardens, Route No. 7, Benson Station,
Omaha

L — Henry E. Sass, Maple Road Gardens, Route No. 7, Benson Station,
Omaha

1934 — Mrs. E. A. Creighton, Red Cloud
1934 — Mr. Erie Smiley, Seward

1933— Miss Marian Day, 631 Kansas St., Superior
C — H. P. Sass, Midwest Gardens, Washington

NEVADA

1934 — Garden Gate Club, Mrs. Paulina E. Westover, R. F. D. No. 1, Box

209, Reno

1933 — Mrs. Ludovica D. Graham, 1079 Ralston St., Reno

NEW HAMPSHIRE

1928 — Robert J. Graves, M. D., 5 South State St., Concord

1931 — Hamilton Smith Library, University of New Hampshire, Durham
1,930 — Keene Normal School, Keene

1934 — Ira S. Littlefield, New London

NEW JERSEY

1931 — Dr. J. S. Wolfe, 44 Watsessing Ave., Bloomfield

1923 — Dr. Nancy Jenison, R. F. D. No. 2, Bound Brook

1933 — Mr. Graham L. Schofield, Care Evening Press Co., Bridgeton

1934— Dr. Arthur J. Casselman, N. W. Cor. N. 2nd and Penn Sts., Camden

1921 — Mrs. Elliott Averett, Dixiedale Farm, Chatham
1923 — Miss Mary J. Averett, Orchard Cottage, Chatham
1930 — S. Houston Baker, 3rd, Denman Road, Cranford

C— Mrs. Edward Harding, Fanwood

1922— Mrs. Stephen Van Hoesen, Fanwood

L — Mrs. Thomas M. DebeVoise, Green Village
1928 — Arthur Herrington, 1 Fairview Road, Madison
C — Mrs. E. P. McKinney, Sunny Lawn, Madison

[85]

C — -Mrs. E. M. Sanford, 37 Green Ave., Madison

1933 — T. P. Adler, 96 Llewellyn Road, Montclair

1921 — Mr. Charles H. Caldwell, 55 Warren Place, Montclair
L — Theodore F. Ilussa, 32 Clinton St., Montclair

1934 — Mr. II. F. Hall, Lyndora Gardens, 416 Chester Ave., Moorestown
C — Mr. Edmund W. Maule, 554 Chester Ave., Moorestown

1934 — J. C. Layer, Jr., Morris Plains

1926 — Edward II. Levis, Mt. Holly

L- — William S. Benson, 663 Main Ave., Passaic

1930 — Miss Harriette R. Halloway, 225 E. Seventh St., Plainfield
1923 — Mrs. Howard Huntington, 334 Franklin Place, Plainfield

1925 — Mrs. Chester B. Lawrence, 1000 Hillside Ave., Plainfield

C — Mrs. Henry G. Wells, P. O. Box 86, Plainfield

1927 — Mrs. James Barnes, Princeton

1927- — Miss Natalie Antz, 177 Schley St., Newark

1934 — Essex County Park Commission, 115 Clinton Ave., Newark

1933 — Miss Elizabeth A. Case, 8 Union Place, Newton

1931- — Mrs. B. A. Stewart, 76 Rverson Ave., Newton

1927 — -Mrs. R. A. Harper, So. Paramus Road, Ridgewood

1921 — G. Derby White, 371 S. Irving St., Ridgewood

1925 — Mrs. Benjamin S. Mechling, 303 Bank Ave., Riverton
1920 — Mrs. Henry A. Caesar, Rumson Road, Seabright
L — Mrs. Charles A. Stout, Short Hills
C- — Mrs. John A. Stewart, Jr., Short Hills

1925 — Mrs. David L. George, Pine Acre, Wyoming Ave., South Orange

1928— Mr. O. F. Vought, Box 81, Succasunna
C — Mrs. Herbert R. Johnson, Tenafly

1933 — Mrs. John Kuser, Jr., Titusville

1934 — Mrs. Barbara E. Walther, 474 Upper Montclair
1931 — Mr. David A. Starr, 201 Pine St., Wenonah

1928— Mr. W. Herbert Dole, 23 Overlook Ave., West Orange
1928 — M. E. Douglas, Rugby Place, Woodbury

NEW YORK

1928 — Mrs. A. Gordon Cummins, Barneveld
1931— Joseph E. Cearmak, 46 Pine St., Baldwin, L. L.

1934 — Mrs. Edwin W. Teale, 93 Park Ave., Baldwin, L. I.

1926 — Harry Esty Dounce, 211-26 Waverly Ave., Bayside, L. I.

C — Charlotte Swezey, Northern Blvd. and 215th St., Bayside, L. I.

1922 — Mr. Robert Wayman, 3909 214th Place, Bayside, L. I.

1927 — Mrs. Samuel Verplanck, Roseneath, Beacon-on-Hudson

1927 — Mrs. E. Kellogg Trowbridge, Bedford Hills

C — Mr. Earl S. Miller, 504 Conklin Ave., Binghampton
1922 — Mrs. B. A. Jackson, Lake View Ave., East, Bright Waters, L. I.

1928 — Mrs. Ralph W. Williams, Little Crows Nest, Bronxville
Brooklyn Botanic Garden, 1000 Washington Ave., Brooklyn.

C — Dr. C. Stuart Gager, Director, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, 1000
Washington Ave., Brooklyn

[86]

C — Miss Hilda Loines, 3 Pierrepont Place, Brooklyn
1927 — Miss Maud H. Purdy, 266 Lenox Road, Brooklyn
1923 — Dr. George M. Reed, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn

1927 — Mr. Charles K. Bassett, 278 Depew Ave., Buffalo

1928 — Harry II. Larkin, 160 Windsor Ave., Buffalo

1921 — Rev. J. Storer, 589 Parkside Ave., Buffalo

1930 — Harry F. Little, Camillas — Jesse Nicholls, Jr., Camillus
1934 — Dr. George L. Branch, 318 Main St., Catskill

1925 — Mrs. J. H. Burton, Cedarhurst, L. I.

1928 — Mrs. U. S. Grant, 3rd, Clinton

1928 — -Mr. Edward W. Root, Hamilton College, Clinton

1931 — Mr. H. Naldrett, Box 58, Farmingdale

1931 — Miss A. Gussow, 126 Beach 14 St., Far Rockaway

1932 — Mr. Fred R. Whitney, Hudson Gardens, Germantown
1934— Mr. E. G. Polin, R. F. D. No. 1, Glen

L-C — T. A. Havemeyer, Brookville, Glen Head, L. I.

1927 — Mrs. John C. Baker, Box 65, Great Neck, L. I.

1920 — James C. Stevens, Greenville

1933 — Mrs. Clara E. Wright, 15 Wall St., Gouverneur

1925 — Mrs. Win. C. Ferguson, 37 Atlantic Ave., Hempstead

1934 — John A. Conway, M. D., 206 Main St., Hornell
L — Mrs. Albert G. Milbank, Huntington, L. I.

1921 — Dr. L. H. Bailey, Ithaca

Dept, of Floriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca

New York State College of Agriculture, Library, Ithaca

1922 — Col. J. C. Nicholls, 114 Overlook Road, Ithaca

1926 — Mrs. II. Ries, 401 Thurston Ave., Ithaca

1926 — Albert Hazen Wright, 113 E. Upland Road, Ithaca
1934 — Mrs. E. S. Colyer, 160-44 121st Ave., Jamaica
1931— Mrs. C. F. Johnson, Jr., 335 Main St., Johnson City

1933 — Edgewood Iris Gardens, Mrs. Bess L. Shippy, 536 Willow St.,

Lockport

1934 — Mrs. Montfort C. Holley, 401 Locust St., Lockport

1927 — E. N. S. Ringueberg, M. D., 13 and 15 Main St., Lockport

1931 — Howard R. Glutzbeck, 25 Raymond St., Lynbrook, L. I.

1932 — -Mr. Oliver James Pease, 45 Prospect Ave., Lynbrook, L. I.

L — Alfred J. Crane, Lock Box 888, Monroe

C — Mr. Louis Schmidt, 401 Tecumseh Ave., Mount Vernon
1934 — Mrs. A. G. Bixler, 33 Overlook Circle, New Rochelle

1930 — F. D. Giles, 26 Davis Ave., New Rochelle

C — Mrs. L. W. Hitchcock, 61 Sea view Ave., New Rochelle

1923 — Mrs. Charlotte C. Jones, 100 Broadview Ave., New Rochelle

1922 — Mrs. II. S. Loughran, 10 Hillcrest Ave., New Rochelle

C — Mrs. James J. Montague, 204 Drake Ave., New Rochelle
1921 — Mrs. Maude E. Peckham, 216 Eastchester Road, New Rochelle

1931 — Mrs. Frank M. Wright, 12 Elm St., New Rochelle
1931 — Dr. Samuel D. Bell, 131 E. 74th St., New York

L — Marston T. Bogert, Havemeyer Hall, Columbia University, New York

[87]

L- — Mrs. Willard C. Brinton, 3(5 West 59th St., New York

1932 — John Borin, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx Park, New Yrork
Kenneth R. Boynton, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx Park,
New York

L — J. R. Bruce, 68 William St., New York

1932 — Mr. Frederick W. Cassebeer, 953 Madison Ave., New York

1933 — Mrs. W. Bayard Cutting, 24 E. 72nd St., New York

Mr. A. T. Be La Mare, Editor, Florists Exchange, Box 100 Times
Square Sta., New York

1930 — Mrs. Carl A. Be Gersdorff, 3 E. 73rd St., New York

Farr Memorial Library, Horticultural Society of N. Y., 598 Madi¬
son Ave., New York

Garden Club of America, Secretary, 598 Madison Ave., New York

1934 — Miss Elizabeth R. Greenwood, 11 E. 68th St., New York

Mr. John Hartling, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx Park,
New York

1930 — Mr. William Haynes, 25 Spruce St., New York

1931 — Br. Marshall A. Howe, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx Park,

New York

1930 — Mr. Virgil V. Johnson, Supt., The Andrew Freedman Home, 1125

Grand Concourse, New York
C— C. Lewis, 44 Wall St., New York

1933— Mrs. C. MacCulloch Miller, 18 E. 48th St., New York

1931 — Isabella Pendleton, Landscape Archt., 11-15 East 60th St., New

York

L — John Scheepers, 522 Fifth Ave., New York
1933 — Mr. Charles F. Steinway, Steinway & Sons, 109 W. 57th St., New7
York

Br. A. B. Stout, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx Park, New
York

C — Br. Charles M. Williams, 210 East 68th St., New York
1933 — The Crowell Publishing Company, Att: Mr. Andrew S. Wing, 250
Park Ave., New York

1933— Bavid M. Wood, 2 Wall St., New York

L — Richardson Wright, House and Garden, Graybar Bldg., New York
1933 — Miss H. May Brown, 517 Cedar Ave., Niagara Falls

1933 — F. L. Koethan, 540 College Ave., Niagara Falls

1934 — Mr. Raymond R. Baker, 173 North Ave., Owego

C — Mrs. Robert C. Hill, Niederhurst, Palisades, Rockland County

1930 — Mrs. John M. Perry, Palisades, Rockland County
O — Mrs. M. J. Fox, Foxden, Peekskill

1934 — Mr. Stuart Wilder, 15 Storer Ave., Pelham

Editor Home Acres, Great Oak Lane, Pleasantville

1932 — Mrs. Ruth Bennett, P. O. Box 152, Portville

1934 — Mrs. Willard Ide Pierce, 101 Bleeker St., Port Jefferson

1934 — Mrs. H. A. Fortington, Lime Ridge, Poughquay, Butchess County

1931 — Wm. M. Howell, Box 77, Sonoh Road, Poughkeepsie

1933 — Mrs. O. B. Rogers, 9413 218th St., Queens Village

[88]

C — Charles E. S. Rasay, P. 0. Box 835, Richfield Springs
1928 — Riverdale-on-Hudson Garden Club, Mrs. W. R. Williams, 4710
Delafield Ave., Riverdale-on-Hudson

1927 — Mrs. C1. H. Strater, Locust Ave., R}re

1928 — George D. Jopson, Saugerties

1934 — Mrs. James Baird, 34 Walworth Ave., Scarsdale

1933 — Mr. Kenneth D. Smith, Benedict Road, Dongan Hills, Staten Island
L — Anson W. Peckham, The Lodge, Skylands Farm, Sterlington

L — Mrs. Wheeler H. Peckham, The Lodge, Skylands Farm, Sterlington

1934 — Dr. D. H. Squires, 89 Getzville Road, Snyder

1931 — M. F. Stuntz, 101 Liberty Terrace, Snyder

L — Mrs. Alfred McEwen, Craig Anel, Tarrytown

1931 — Mrs. Elizabeth H. S. Eddy, 27 First St., Troy

1932 — W. A. Budlong, P. 0. Box 385, TJtica

1933 — Mr. James F. Hubbell, Mayro Bldg., Utica

1934 — The Utica Garden Club, Mrs. F. M. Bremiller, Pres., 1917 Bradford

Ave., Utica

1927 — Mrs. Robert Bacon, Westbury, L. I.

1931 — John M. C. Emory, Powell’s Lane, Westbury, L. I.

1933 — Mr. W. J. Young, Quarters 329, West Point

1930 — Mrs. Robert C. Green, 105 S. Broadway, White Plains
1925 — Florence L. Barrows, 40 Greystone Park, Yonkers

L — Dr. Crocker, Boyce Thompson Inst, for Plant Research, 1086 N.
Broadway, Yonkers

NORTH CAROLINA

1934 — Mrs. M. L. Church, 2209 Sherwood Ave., Charlotte
1934 — Miss Eugenia W. Lore, 109 W. Depot St., Concord
1930 — Dr. Frederic M. Hanes, Duke Hospital, Durham

C — Mary C. Bissell, Box 257, Franklin

1928 — Miss Virginia Ragsdale, Jamestown
1934 — Mrs. Carl H. Boone, Norwood

1930 — Miss Cicely C. Browne, State College Station, Raleigh

1931 — Mrs. Frank Stevens, 345 Stratford Road, Winston-Salem

NORTH DAKOTA

1934 — Rev. Ellis L. Jackson, 519 Fourth St., Bismarck

1933 — Miss Bertha Faust, Route No. 4, Valley City

OHIO

1931 — -Mr. K. W. Johnson, 1721 Hampton Road, Akron

1934 — Mrs. W. R. Hamilton, 1390 N. Hague Ave., Route 1, Camp Chase

C — Mrs. Wm. H. Altamer, 1511 Groesbeck Road, College Hill, Cincinnati
L — Dr. W. McL. Ayres, Box 79, R. R. 10, Station M, Cincinnati
1931— Mrs. Stephen E. Cone, 194 E. McMillan St., Mt. Auburn, Cin-
cinnatti

1925 — Mrs. Wm. M. Doughty, 628 Elm St., Cincinnati
1931 — Col. Nelson J. Edwards, 1219 First National Bank Bldg., Cin¬
cinnati

[89]

C — Mrs. J. F. Emigholz, R. F. D. 10, Box 23 OF, Cincinnati
L — Carl H. Krippendorf, 622 Sycamore St., Cincinnati
C — Mr. Charles S. Phillips, 200 Provident Bank Bldg., S. E. Cor.
7th and Vine Sts., Cincinnati

1921 — Mrs. Lewis R. Smith, 2215 Victory Parkway, Cincinnati
C — Mr. John Dee Wareham, Rockwood Pottery, Cincinnati
1921 — Mrs. S. B. Waters, 2005 Edgecliff Point, Cincinnati
1927 — Mrs. Dennis Weiskopf, 3946 Brookline Ave., Cincinnati
1934 — Franklin McVicker, 603 Oneida Road, Chillicothe
1934 — Garden Center of Greater Cleveland, East Blvd. and Euclid Ave.,
Cleveland

1934 — Mrs. K. F. Holden, 1614 Hazel St., Cleveland
1921 — Lewis R. Smith, R. R. 1, Collinsville

1927 — Mrs. J. H. Arbuckle, 1291 Sunbury Road, Columbus
1925 — Mr. E. H. Bretschneider, 1388 Bryden Road, Columbus

1934 — Columbus Iris Society, Garden Center, E. Broad St., Columbus
1934 — Mrs. W. J. Hamilton, 10S2 Broadview Ave., Columbus
1921 — Mrs. R. C. Kyle, 1222 Lincoln Road, Columbus

C — Mr. George R. Syfert, 1541 Franklin Park South, Columbus
1925 — Dr. A. E. Waller, 201 Stanbury Ave., Bexley, Columbus
C — Mr. Karl H. Lorenz, 390 W. 1st St., Dayton
1934 — Roy W. Gottschalk, 201 Summit St., Marion

1928 — Louis H. Frechtling, M. IX, Box 205, R. R. No. 5, Meadowcroft,

Hamilton

1925 — R. P. Wenham, Painesville

C — Mrs. G. B. Groesbeck, Perintown
1934 — Mr. Luther B. C. Webb, Beemont Farm, Perrysburg
1927 — Mrs. Oliver C. Clarke, Westwind, R. D. No. 7, Springfield

1932 — Mr. W. R. LeGron, LeGron Floral Co., 125 Amherst Drive, Toledo

1933 — Mr. F. W. Lindsley, 4322 Commonwealth Ave., Toledo

C — Mr. Lee R. Bonnewitz, 666 S. Washington St., Van Wert
1920 — Mr. Charles F. Wassenberg, Van Wert

1931 — Harry R. O’Brien, Four O’clock Garden Nursery, Wilson Road,
West, Worthington

1925 — Mr. James B. Bennett, 1106 First National Bldg., Youngstown

OKLAHOMA

1931 — Mrs. Charles E. Decker, 508 Chautauqua Ave., Norman

1933 — Mrs. Guy Y. Williams, 468 Elm Ave., Norman

1932— The Oklahoma State Iris Society, Mrs. B. W. Sprankle, Secretary,

636 E. Park PI., Oklahoma City

1931 — Iris Unit G. F. C., Cleta Stubblefield, Secretary, 612 N. E. 9th
St., Oklahoma City

1934 — Miss Eleanor Hill, 1220 S. Boston, Tulsa
1931— Mrs. Helen T. Roe, 1311 East 26th St., Tulsa

OREGON

C — National Iris Gardens, Howard and Thurlow Weed, Beaverton

1933 — Grant E. Mitsch, Brownsville

[90]

1934 — Mrs. A. I. C. Black, R. R. No. 2, Corvallis

1927 — Carl Starker, Florist, Jennings Lodge

1933 — Mrs. G. A. Krause, 229 High St., Klamath Falls

1924 — Mrs. L. E. Williams, 520 S. Peach St., Medford

1925 — Mrs. J. A. McKinnon, 806 Upper Drive, Portland

1934 — Mr. L. A. Bundy, Oregon Fairview Home, Salem

1931 — Oregon State Library, Miss Harriet Long, Librarian, Salem
1933 — -Jan de Graaff, Sandy

1930 — R. M. Cooley, 810 N. Water St., Silverton
1925 — Dr. R. E. Kleinsorge, Silverton

PENNSYLVANIA

School of Horticulture, Ambler
L-C — Mrs. J. Edgar Hires, Ardmore

1928 — John R. Hogan, 117 Llanfair Road, Ardmore

1933 — Mr. Phillip Martsolf, 1036 Fifth St., Beaver
1925 — Mrs. Mary F. Smith, Box 21, Bethayres

L — Mrs. Isaac La Boiteaux, Bryn Mawr

Orin C. Groover, 29 S. 27th St., Camp Hill

1931 — Miss Mary L. Stewart, 755 Philadelphia Ave., Chambersburg

1934 — Miss Katherine Tutcher, Penarile Road, Cynwyd
1921 — Mrs. W. B. Mercer, Doylestown

1933 — Linden G. Owens, Elizabethtown

1931 — Mrs. John Barclay, 320 W. Pittsburg St., Greensburg
C — Mrs. W. M. Jacobs, Box 910, Harrisburg
C — Miss Anne R. Kelker, 15 S. Front St., Harrisburg
1920 — Dr. J. Horace McFarland, Box 687, Harrisburg

L — Mrs. Haldeman O’Conner, 13 North Front St., Harrisburg

1923 — Mr. Ryland W. Greene, 161 Rose Lane, Haverford
C — C. H. Hall, Ingomar

1931 — Mrs. H. A. Coleman, 717 Ferndale Ave., Johnstown
1928 — Mrs. Pierre S. duPont, Kennett Square

Jacques Cattell, Science Press, Lancaster
1927 — Edward C. Trax, 15th and R. R. Sts., McKeesport

1925 — Fairman R. Furness, Upper Bank Farm, Media
L — Mrs. Arthur H. Scott, Route No. 3, Media

1933 — Mrs. Medford Brown, Haywood Road, Merion

1926 — O. E. Watkins, 1129 Penna. Ave., Oakmont, Allegheny County

1926 — Mr. Wm. Atkiss, 1145 Herbert St., Frankford Station, Philadelphia
1920 — Anna Warren Ingersoll, 1815 Walnut St., Philadelphia

1924 — Th-a Penna Horticultural Society, 1600 Arch St., Philadelphia

1932 — Mr. Thomas W. Sears, Top Floor, Girard Trust Bldg., S. Penn

Square, Philadelphia

L-C — John C. Wister, Wister Street and Clarkson Ave., Germantown,
Philadelphia

C — Mr. Daniel A. Atkinson, 132 Oakwood Ave., West View, Pittsburg
L — Eleanor McC. Chalfant, 5028 Mosewood Place, Pittsburg

1932- — Mr. Wm. J. Peck, 220 Washington St., Pittston

[91]

1930— Mr. T. L. Pillow, 3203 Orleans St., N. S. Pittsburg

1930 — William H. Evans, Box No. 5, Plainsville

C — Mr. Byron Barnes Horton, 410 S. Main St., Sheffield
1921 — Mrs. George V. Harper, Shippensburg
C — Miss Jane F. Lane, R. D. 1, St. Thomas

1930 — Agricultural Library, Penna. State College, State College
L — Mrs. C. S. Ristine, Strafford

1932 — John Dolman, Jr., 304 Vassar Ave., Swarthmore
1927— F. R. Strayer, Box 22, West Chester

1931 — Edmund G. Linton, Worthington, Armstrong County

RHODE ISLAND

1926 — Allen W. Chatterton, 26 Kossuth St., Pawtucket
1926 — Ralph E. Kenyon, Box 655, Pawtucket
1926 — Miss Leila P. Bowen, 194 Waterman St., Providence

1931 — Anna L. Evans, 145 Medway St., Providence
1921 — Prof. John E. Hill, 86 Taber Ave., Providence

1931 — Mrs. James H. McCallion, Beaufort Gardens, 30 Beaufort St.,
Providence

SOUTH CAROLINA

1933 — Mrs. Sheffield Phelps, Rose Hill, Aiken

1926 — Mrs. H. L. McColl, 105 Jennings St., Bennettsville

1933 — Mrs. Arthur Baskin, 23 Ridge St., Bishopville

1931 — Wm. Elliott, 909-913 National Loan & Exchange Bank Bldg.,
Columbia

TENNESSEE

1931 — Clint McDade, Rivermont Drive, Chattanooga

1934 — Mrs. E. F. Jones, Gallatin

1934 — Mrs. James F. Leahy, Ball Camp Pike, Route No. 7, Knoxville

1931 — Mrs. W. C. Ross, 4155 Lyons View Pike, Knoxville

1931 — Hubert F. Fisher, 640 Anderson St., Memphis

1931 — Mrs. Morgan Ketchum, 178 S. McLean Blvd., Memphis

1934 — Mr. Geddes Douglas, 2700 Belair Ave., Nashville

1933 — Mrs. Rufus E. Fort, Fortland, Nashville

C — Dr. L. C. Glenn, 2110 Garland Ave., Nashville
C — Dr. J. II. Kirkland, Vanderbilt University, Nashville

1931 — Mrs. Edward C. Stahlman, 1501 21st Ave., South, Nashville
1923 — Mr. I. A. Washington, 1700 18th Ave., South, Nashville

1932 — Thomas A. Williams, Printing Crafts Bldg., 417 Commerce St.,

Nashville

TEXAS

1931 — Mrs. II. B. Armstrong, 2628 Wichita St., Austin

1931 — Mrs. James R. Hamilton, 2405 Nueces St., Austin

1932 — Mr. Frederick McAllister, Dept, of Botany and Bacteriology, Uni¬

versity of Texas, Austin

1932 — Mr. S. H. Yarnell, Division of Horticulture, Texas Horticultural
Exp. Sta., College Station

1926 — Mrs. Wm. II. Benners, 236 N. Lancaster Ave., Dallas

1930— Mrs. M. F. Kirk, 3805 Stratford Ave., Dallas

1926 — Mrs. Gross R. Scruggs, 3715 Turtle Creek Blvd., Dallas

1931 — -Holly B. Hampton, 4501 Dallas Pike, Forth Worth

1934 — Mrs. C. D. Reimers, 425 S. Hudson St., Fort Worth
1934 — Mrs. Allen B. Hannay, 2007 River Oaks Blvd., Houston
1933 — Mrs. W. H. Bledsoe, 1812 Broadway, Lubbock

1931 — George M. Allen, 1915 W. Magnolia Ave., San Antonio

1933 — -Mr. J. II. French, 118 Green Lawn Drive, San Antonio

1934 — -Mrs. Vlasta Frels, Yorktown

UTAH

1933 — Mrs. Maud Chegwidden, 4137 S. Ninth St., East, Salt Lake City

1927 — Mr. Herman F. Tliorup, 1195 Crystal Ave., Salt Lake City

VERMONT

1928 — Mary E. G. Freeborn, Proctor

1928— Henry T. Coe, Putney, Windham County

1927— Miss Miriam E. Marsh, 40 Park St., Springfield

1927 — Annie D. Hazen, Box 472, White River Junction

VIRGINIA

1928 — Mrs. Philip P. Campbell, Arlington

1933— C. W. Culpepper, Route No. 1, Ballston

C — Mr. H. P. Simpson, Glebe Road, Livingston Heights, Cherrydale

1934 — -Miss Sadie B. Earheart, The Flower Patch, Christiansburg

1925 — Miss Florence Thompson, Lincoln Ave., East Falls Church

1933 — Mr. Benjamin G. Fernald, Hilton Village
C — Mr. Thomas M. Fendall, Leesburg

1923 — -Josephine P. Kinnier, 518 Washington St., Lynchburg

1932 — Mrs. R. L. Nicholson, Ingleside Ave., McLean

1934 — Miss Elizabeth Ivy, Hampton Roads Garden Club, Newport News
1928 — Mrs. John W. Friend, 28 N. Union St., Petersburg

1926 — Mrs. H. B. Frischkorn, 3500 Chamberlayne Ave., Richmond

1925 — Mrs. George A. Tower, 6213 Three Chopt Road, Richmond
1931 — Mr. J. P. Fishburn, P. O. Box 2531, Roanoke

1930 — Mrs. William Wayt Gibbs, Gibbs Hill, Staunton

1926 — Mrs. John R. Fisher, Williamsburg

1920 — Mrs. Joseph Walker, Woodberry Forest

WASHINGTON

1933 — Julius Dornblut, Jr., 3100 Niagara St., Bellingham

1931 — Mrs. N. N. Nelson, 8th and Libby Sts., Clarkston

1933 — Mrs. J. J. Miller, Miller’s Gardens, Grandview
1923 — Seattle Public Library, Seattle

1931 — Mr. Harry L. Stinton, Route No. 9, Box 822, Seattle
1925— F. A. Thole, Thole’s Gardens, 2754 45th Ave., S. W., Seattle
1930 — Frank H. Ludwigs, 111 W. Main St., Walla Walla

1934 — Garden Club of Wapato, Mrs. C. A. Jones, Wapato

[93]

WEST VIRGINIA

1925 — Dr. Ford B. Rogers, Peacock Park, Fairmont

1933— Huntington Garden Club, Mrs. Grady Risen, Cor. Sec’y., 319 14th

St., Huntington

1931 — Dr. H. E. Knowlton, Dept, of Horticulture, West Virginia Univer¬
sity, Morgantown

1931 — Mrs. H. A. Barbee, Point Pleasant

WISCONSIN

1931 — Mrs. P. B. Haber, 47 Woodland Ave., Fond du Lac
1928 — Leo J. Engleberg, 142 S. 6th St., La Crosse

1932 — Dr. Paul R. Hahn, 2028 Grange Ave., Racine

1932 — Mrs. Louis Le Mieux, 2004 Ludington Ave., Wauwatosa

FOREIGN

AFRICA

1923 — Mrs. Frank Joyce, Kilima Ivui, Ulu Kenya Colony, East Africa

AUSTRALIA

1928 — A. M. Harrison, 4 Hurlestone St., Prahran, S. I., Melbourne

1926 — Mr. L. W. Wheeler, Eden Hill, South Australia

1934 — Mrs. Mary L. Wheeler, Woodlands, Blackburn Road, Blackburn, Vic

toria, Australia

BELGIUM

1927 — Joseph Aerts, 41 Rue Horace, Anderlecht
Melchoir, Fr., 33 Bd. Goffens, Hasselt

CANADA

1934 — Mr. J. J. F. Winslow, Winslow & McNair, Barristers & Solicitors,
Fredericton, N. B.

William Miles, Surreyhurst Farm, Ingersoll, Ontario
Mr. C. E. German, 521 Colborne St., London, Ontario
C — Mr. Edgar Jeffery, 65 Orchard St., London, Ontario
Mr. Alexander M. Ross, 113 Brisbin St., London, Ontario
C — Mr. William E. Saunders, 240 Central Ave., London, Ontario

Mrs. R. Percy Adams, 732 Upper Lansdowne Ave., Westmont,
Montreal

L-C — F. Cleveland Morgan, Care Henry Morgan & Co., Ltd., Colonial
House, Montreal

1931 — W. R. Leslie, Supt., Experiment Station, Morden, Manitoba
Mr. A. R. Ibbotson, Supt., Box 172, Souris, Manitoba
1925 — Miss L. A. Waddell, Perth, Ontario

Dr. C. T. Hilton, P. O. Box 26, Port Alberni, B. C.

1930 — Mr. R. Eric Fisher, R. R. No. 1, Bolton Centre, Quebec
1927— Macdonald College, Horticultural Dept., Macdonald College P. O., Quebec
L — Harry A. Norton, Ayres Cliff, Quebec

[94]

1921 — Miss M. E. Blacklock, Rowancroft Gardens, Meadowvale, Ontario
Mrs. Lewis J. M. Grant, 159 Laclie St., Orillia, Ontario

1925 — W. T. Macoun, Dominion Agriculturist, Central Exp. Farm, Ottawa,

Ontario

1931 — Scarboro Gardens Co., Ltd., Scarboro, Ontario

1930 — II. H. Groff, Simcoe, Ontario

1931 — Mr. F. L. Green, Greenwood, Ontario

1928 — Charles Bauckham, 372 Bay St., Toronto 2
1931 — A. H. Harkness, Room 620, 57 Bloor St., W. Toronto
1934 — Miss Ann Laidlow, 32 North Shelbourne St., Toronto
S. M. Screaton, Suite 4, No. 1 Oriole Road, Toronto
Mrs. Biggerstaff Wilson, 1770 Rockland Ave., Victoria, B. C.

Mrs. D. Williamson, 525 Mount Pleasant Ave., Westmount, P. Q.
C — Mr. L. T. Chadwick, 1100 Paris Bldg., Winnipeg, Manitoba
Mr. G. S. Holmes, 187 Cordova St., Winnipeg, Manitoba
Mr. II. Montcrieff, 1191 Wellington Crescent, Winnepeg, Manitoba

ENGLAND

1928 — F. Wynn Hellings, Fleur-De-Lis, 41, Grove Way, Esher, Surrey
H — George Yeld, Orleton Wood Common, Gerrards Cross, Bucks
1921 — Major G. Churcher, T. D., Beckworth Linfield, Hayward Heath,
Sussex

C — 'Geoffrey L. Pilkington, Lower Lee Woolton, Liverpool
L — Lady Collet, St. Clere, Kemsing, Kent

1926 — F. J. Chittenden, Tech. Adviser, Royal Horticultural Society, Vin¬

cent Square, London, S. W.

Herbert Cowley, Editor, Bouverie House, Gardening Illustrated,
London

1931 — Royal Horticultural Society, Vincent Square, Westminster, Lon¬
don, S. W. 1

1930— Miss M. Gardner, Spencer, Maidenhead, Berks

1934 — Mr. W. R. Cranfield, East Lodge, Enfield Chase, Middlesex

1931 — Mr. B. R. Long, Hill Orest, Moorside, Oldham Lanes
1921 — The Orpington Nurseries, Ltd., Orpington, Kent

1931 — Mr. R. E. S. Spender, Halshanger, Bagley Wood, Oxford
1926 — C. W. Christie-Miller, Swyncombe House, Oxon

H— W. J. Carparne, Saints Bay, Guernsey, Channel Islands
1926— II. Chadburn, Middleton, Saxmundham, Suffolk

L — Miss Sophia B. Steel, Anglefield, South Godstone, Surrey
1931 — Miss L. Pesel, The White House, Colebrook St., Winchester

Mr. F. C. Brown, Royal Horticultural Gardens, Wisley, Ripley,
Surrey

1934 — Mr. Angus Wilson, Tidcombe Manor, Nr. Marlborough, Wiltshire
1926 — -George Dillistone, Editor, The Iris Society, 43 Claremont Rd.,
Tunbridge Wells

II — R. W. Wallace, Tunbridge Wells

1931 — John Waterer Sons & Crisp, Ltd., The Floral Mile, Twyford Berks

[95]

FRANCE

H — Lionel Millet, Amilly, Loiret
1923 — Cayeux-Le Clerc and Cie, 8 Quai de la Megisserie, Paris
Mr. Ferdinand Cayeux, 8 Quai de Megisserie, Paris
Editor Revue Horticole, 26 Rue Jacob, Paris

Le Bibliotliecaire en Chef, Museum National D ’Histoire Naturelle
Rue de Buffon NB, Paris

M. Nomblot, Sec’y-Gen. Societe Nationale, D ’Horticulture de France
84 Rue de Crenelle, Paris

H — M. F. Denis, Villa Les Armandiers, Tamaris sur Mer, Var

GERMANY

Editor Gartenschonheit, Verlag der Gartenschonheit, Berlin
Camillo Schneider, Neu Ansbrucherstr. 12, Berlin W. 30

1925 — Alexander Steffen, Pillnitz, Dresden
Kurt-Heimart-Holscher, Kaiserallee 29, Travemunde

HOLLAND

H — E. H. Krelage, Stoeburgstr. G, Haarlem

ITALY

Marchesa Iris Origo, La Foa, Chianciano, (Siena)

1926 — Oontessa Guilo Senni, Grottaf errata, Roma

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Bulletin of the American Iris Society"

See other formats