104 



HOKTlCULTURIi 



July 27, 1907 



THE PEONY. 



Address of J. Eliot Colt before Amierl- 



can Peony Society, Ithaca, N. Y., 



June 27, 1907. 



{Continued from page yy). 



Type II, the Japanese. 

 When a peony begins to double un- 

 der the gi-owth iiressure brought about 

 by an excess of food, it may do it in 

 two ways. It may present in the same 

 flower stamens or carpels in all stages 

 of transformation, or it may uniformly 

 widen the filaments of all the stamens 

 simultaneously. As a result of this 

 second method, we get the true Japan- 

 ese type. It possesses the petals of the 

 single with all of its stamens uniform- 

 ly widened into strap-like petaloids 

 with anthers distorted in various ways. 

 It usually has normal carpels. Many 

 writers seem to hold the erroneous 

 notion that Japanese peonies are the 

 progeny of some one species. C. S. 

 Harrison in the second edition of his 

 Peony Manual talks about the wonder- 

 ful possibilities of the "new race" of 

 Japanese peonies. This is not a "race" 

 at all according to the definition of 

 race as given by Professor H. J. Web- 

 ber of this University, for this type 

 may and does appear in several species. 

 It simply represents one method or 

 step in petalody of the stamens of any 

 species. It is a horticultural type and 

 is entitled to no botanical standing 

 whatever. Example: Glory. (Illus- 

 trated on the cover of the Peony 

 Chenk-T.ist.) 



Type III, the Bomb. 



The bomb is one step beyond the 

 Japanese. The guard petals are still 

 well differentiated from ihe pataloids, 

 but the petaloids are much wider and 

 no vestiges of anthers should be found 

 upon tbern. They may have increased 

 in number beyond the original number 

 of stamens by chorisls of the cords. 

 In the typical bomb, the follicles 

 should be well concealed. I regard 

 Chas. Binder as a good example of this 

 type. 



Type IV, Semi-Double. 



Into this type we group those forms 

 which have oegun to double without 

 any system. Tliey present in the same 

 flower both stamens and follicles in all 

 stages of transformation. They are 

 usually loose flowers of little character, 

 and in general are undesirable. They 

 are common in any batch of seedlings, 

 especially the semi-double reds; and 

 I am perfectly safe in saying that far 

 too many of them have been given 

 names and places in our lists. It is 

 in this type that the greatest confusion 

 of names exists, and we may find it 

 necessary to use somewhat drastic 

 measures in bringing this group into 

 anything like satisfactory shape; and 

 much is yet to be done before any- 

 thing like success is achieved. 

 Type V, the Crown. 



When the Japanese tyiie retains its 

 narrow petaloids but transforms its 

 follicles into wicie petals which re- 

 semble the guard petals, we have a 

 two-story effect which is unique and 



for which I propose the name Crown. 



The Crown may be of two kinds: erect 

 crown 01' refloxed crown. Princess 

 Beatrice iKelwayi is a very good ex- 

 ample of this type. 



Type VI, the Rose. 



The rose type represents the fullest 

 development of which the peony flower 

 is capable. It is fully double, with all 

 stamens and carpels transformed into 

 petals with no vestiges of anthers 

 present and no follicles. Few examples 

 of the rose type will be found which 

 do not show vestiges of follicles, for 

 the crimson flecks present in Festiva 

 maxima and Avalanche represent the 

 only remains of the lost follicles. 

 These crimson flecks are very common 

 among flowers of this type, and may 

 be found in the double reds on close 

 examination. In the typical rose form, 

 the guard or primary petals should not 

 be differentiated from the rest; but 

 this is not essential. A good example 

 of the rose type is Avalanche 

 (Cronsse). 



How Confusion Has Arisen. 



The confusion in ihe names of 

 peonies of which so nuich complaint 

 is made, has arisen in several ways. 

 Most important of these is the habit 

 of making inadequate descriptions. As 

 an example I may say that the descrip- 

 tion we have of Mons. Bellart (Delache, 

 1.S50) consists of two words, "clear 

 purple." Today when we have such a 

 large number of varieties on the mar- 

 ket, such a description is useless and 

 any description is inadequate which 

 does not give the color, size, season, 

 and horticultural type, together with 

 the species to which it belongs. Other 

 causes for confusion are the poor at- 

 tachment of labels to the roots, and 

 illegibly written labels. Then, too, the 

 lack of a check-list has resulted in 

 the same name being used over and 

 over again for different seedlings. And 

 then a certain amount of renaming 

 of old varieties for purposes of pecuni- 

 ary gain has been indulged in by ir- 

 responsible growers. I hope that the 

 check-list will be used for reference to 

 all names already published, and that 

 this Society may maintain a register 

 to tal;e care of the new acquisitions 

 from year to year. It remains for the 

 members of this Society to all work 

 together to build up a sentiment which 

 will cause every producer of a new 

 variety to send in specimens and com- 

 plete descriptions, together with a 

 photograph and a proposed name, be- 

 fore he offers the variety to the trade. 

 In return for this the Society might 

 issue to him a number and allow him 

 to advertise his new variety as Ameri- 

 can Peony Society No. . If the 



secretary found that the type of bloom 

 he offered for registration was already 

 well represented and that his seedling 

 almost duplicated several already 

 registered, he could discourage the 

 registration of that name and furnish 

 the grower with the names of those 

 which it alieady duplicates. Now, my 

 friends, the qiiestion arises. Will the 

 growers do all this? I maintain that 

 this plan is perfectly practicable and is 

 the most natural thing to rio, and the 

 degree to which it will succeed will 

 depend solely upon the moral strength 

 and commercial prestige of the mem- 

 bers of this Society and in the degree 

 in which people believe in its honesty 

 and reliabilitv. Whatever work we 



do with peonies, we must do it care- 

 fully and well, and in such a way that 

 it will stand the test of the years. If 

 this is done, peony growers everywhere 

 will covet our registration numbers. 

 If it is not done, they will not care 

 a rap for our numbers. When we come 

 to consider this subject, we find that 

 we are dealing with principles which 

 reach far beyond mere peonies. 

 Whether we have to do with apples or 

 roses, potatoes or chrysanthemums^ 

 we must face the question of variety 

 descriptions and variety records. 

 Therefore the question arises: 

 What Is a Variety? 

 Ever since the early forties when 0. 

 M. Hovey deluged the readers of 

 "Hovey's Horticultural Magazine" with 

 lengthy discussions in regard to varie- 

 ties of strawberries down to recent 

 times when the fruit growers of the 

 west were wrought up to such an in- 

 tense state of excitement over the 

 Gano and Black Ben Davis apple con- 

 troversy, this question has been the 

 cause of prolonged discussion. One 

 faction holds that every seedling from 

 a plant (which does not come true from 

 seed) is a distinct variety. This idea 

 of a variety is based on Its origin. The 

 other faction holds that a variety is a 

 group established by man for con- 

 venience in trade. Those persons who 

 describe seedling peonies with the first 

 idea iu mind, add greatly to the con- 

 fusion, for where many seedlings are 

 raised, many of them necessarily very 

 closely resemble each other. 



Can the Same Variety Originate 



Twice? 

 Here again we have a much fomented 

 question and one which depends for an 

 answer on the idea you have as to 

 what a variety is. I take the ground 

 that a variety is a group of forms 

 which is made for convenience and in 

 which the forms are near enough alike 

 to pass for the same thing in the peony 

 trade. I therefore hold that varieties 

 can and do originate at different times 

 and places and that it is our duty to 

 reduce to synonyms those names which 

 have been given different seedlings of 

 the same variety. We should not be 

 too radical in this, however, but should 

 always allow distinct names for all 

 seedlings which have differences suf- 

 flcient to be detected by the eye trained 

 for peonies. It seems to me that this 

 is the only way out of the difficulty. 



How to Describe Color. 

 Theoretically we .should describe 

 colors in percentages of the primary 

 colors, which may be obtained by ro- 

 tating a graduated wheel with sliding 

 color scales upon it. This niiitUod, 

 however, is too complicated and time- 

 consuming for peony work, and we 

 have therefore to rely upon some color 

 chart. After looking over the various 

 charts available, I am convinced that 

 the chart published recently hy the 

 French Chrysanthemum Society is by 

 far the best. I am therefore using this 

 and giving the popular term for the 

 color for ordinary use. The page and 

 number of the page are also quoted 

 and may be referred to in case definite 

 and critical comparisons are to be 

 raade. The title of this work is 

 "Repertoire de Couleurs" (Index of 

 Colors) and it contains hundreds of 

 charts in almost every conceivable 

 shade. 



