52 THE FLORIST. 



were felt as to its being perfectly distinct from some varieties of the 

 St. Peter section, evident affinity thereto being proved by its foliage ; 

 and on this occasion it was not considered quite so juicy as West's 

 St. Peter's. The meeting were of opinion that Mr. Wighton should 

 be invited to send it again next year, on the days specially appointed 

 for the examination of collections of Grapes, and that the final opinion 

 of the society regarding it should be reserved until then. — Mr. Melville 

 (Dalmeny Park, near Edinburgh) again sent his Seedling Muscat 

 Grape, which had been laid before previous meetings (August 19 and 

 September 9) ; and being then considered promising, was invited to be 

 exhibited in a higher state of development next year. In this instance, 

 a small bunch was sent, upon a third lateral shoot, to evince the 

 prolific habit of the variety. 



FRUIT EXHIBITED AT THIS MEETING FOR PREMIUMS. 

 Class A. — Premiums of 1/. and 10s. for the best and second best 

 six fruits of Glou Morceau Pear (growers in the Channel Islands 

 excluded from competing in this class). Nine very excellent dishes 

 were exhibited, from different parts of the country, and so nearly did 

 they approach each other, that it was not an easy matter to decide 

 upon their respective merits. The following, however, is the order in 

 which they were placed : — The first prize was awarded to a dish 

 exhibited by Mr. J. Hall, (gardener to T. Lucas, Esq., Lower Grove 

 House, Roehampton), from west wall, free stock; soil light and sandy, 

 over very porous and drained subsoil. Fruit medium sized for the 

 variety, very handsome and perfect, deliciously juicy and melting, 

 with very rich sugary flavour. Considered one of the finest dishes of 

 Pears which had been exhibited at the society's rooms this year. — 

 The second prize, to a dish by Mr. Tiley, Abbey Churchyard, Bath, 

 from an espalier, on Pear stock ; soil stiff loam, over strong clay. 

 Fruit small, compared with those from walls, very juicy, melting, and 

 sugary. The comparative quality of the remaining dishes was 

 according to the order in which they are described : — 



By Mr. Wighton, Cossey, Norfolk, from east wall, on light soil, artificially 

 enriched, over brown sand and gravel. Fruit medium sized ; most buttery, and 

 richly flavoured. Very highly commended. Reported to be a shy bearer, and 

 apt to crack, in this case. 



By F. J . Graham, Esq., Cranford, Middlesex, from west wall, Pear stock ; 

 soil sandy loam, over stony clay, naturally wet, but drained. Fruit small, but 

 juicy, melting, vinous, and sugary. Reported to be fine flavoured on south 

 wall, but subject to be spotted and cracked. 



By Mr. Whiting, the Deepdene, Dorking, from east wall; old tree; soil 

 sandy. Fruit medium sized; buttery, melting, and sugary; but slightly 

 astringent. Reported not to succeed on pyramids in this garden. 



By Mr. Duncan (gardener to J. Malcolm, Esq., Lamb Abbey, Eltham, 

 Kent), from a south-west wall. Fruit medium sized, melting, and sweet, but 

 not high flavoured, in comparison with other dishes. 



By Mr. Cox (gardener to W. Wells, Esq., Redleaf, Penshurst, Kent), from 

 west wall, regrafted twelve years back on an old Pear tree; soil rich garden 

 mould, over yellow argillaceous clay, rather damp, recently drained. Fruit 

 very large, pale coloured, buttery, and sweet. 



By Mr. Stoddart (gardener to J. Gurdon Rebow, Esq., M.P., Wivenhoe 

 Park, near Colchester), from south-west wall, Pear stock; soil rich garden 

 mould, over stony loamy clay, damp, but drained. Fruit very large and green, 

 juicy, and buttery, but not high flavoured. 



