NRW YORK 

 BOTaNJCAL 



piiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin^ 



' GARDENERS' CHRONICLE 



(OF AMERICA) 

 Devoted to the Science of Floriculture and Horticulture 



I Vol. XXVI 



iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin 



MAY. 1922 



No. 5 I 

 iiiiiniiiiiuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiM 



Things and Thoughts of the Garden 



MONTAGUE FREE 



AT last a little controversy has been started liecause 

 of opinions expressed on this page. 



The following note has been received from ^Ir. 

 Edwin Beckett of Aldenham House Gardens : 



"I had pleasure in reading your notes in, I believe, the 

 G.-VRDEXERs' Mag.xzine, regarding Aldenham. [May I 

 say, whilst writing, that you could have used the phrase 

 as to our Trees and Shrubs numbering anything between 

 'Seven and ten thousand species and varieties" without 

 fear of contradiction, for the statement made to you was 

 quite accurate, especially as you will no doubt recall that 

 your guide explained that such figure included plants of 

 recent introduction that were still luider collectors' num- 

 bers, and which for the time being were rightly classed 

 as at any rate distinct varieties until determined by the 

 leading botanists. Comparison of this figure with the 

 Kew Hand List was rather out of the question, inasmuch 

 as such work was last published in 1902. when their 

 varieties were then numbered as about 4,500. That was 

 nearly twenty years ago, since when wondrous strides 

 in the direction of new introductions, and newly raised 

 hybrids, have been made, and I think you will now agree 

 that our figure is quite a probable one. 



"Perhaps you will be able to call attention to these 

 facts in the jnurnal in question, as thev certainlv deserve 

 this." 



In the first place the statement made by our guide and 

 quoted in the article referred to, was, if our memory is 

 correct, that "the number of species and varieties was 

 around ten thousand.'" This we understood to mean a 

 few more, or a few less, than ten thousand — not possibly 

 three thousand less. 



We do not doubt for a moment that there are trees and 

 shrubs at Aldenham under ten thousand or even more 

 different names and numbers, but we are still doubtful 

 whether these names and numbers represent well marked 

 species and varieties, according to our conception of what 

 constitutes a distinct species or variety. .Some taxono- 

 mists, as is well known, are inclined to split up genera 

 into • innumerable species and varieties which many 

 botanists and horticulturists would not recognize as such. 



In connection with Mr. Beckett"s contention that "Com- 

 parison of this figure with the Kew Hand List was rather 

 out of the question * * *,"' we point out that our state- 

 ment was: "In the 'Kew Hand List of Trees and Shrubs' 

 published in 1902, the number of species of trees and 

 shrubs cultivated there is given as three thousand.'" The 

 number of varieties was not mentioned as at the time that 

 information was not available. The fact that the Kew 



Hand List was published twenty years ago and that a 

 large number of new trees and shrubs were introduced 

 during the last twenty years was recognized in the fol- 

 lowing sentence which iMr. Beckett perhaps overlooked — 

 ■'It is scarcely possible, even allowing for the numerous 

 new species of trees and shrubs introduced by Wilson 

 and others during the past two decades, that the num- 

 ber of woody plants capable of cultivation outdoors in 

 England has been increased to the extent of six or seven 

 thousand." 



\\'e assume that Mr. Beckett means that the number 

 of species and varieties cultivated at Kew numbered 

 4,500 in 1902, and not 4,500 varieties plus 3,C00 species, 

 in which case the above sentence should be amended to 

 read : It is doubtful if the number of woodv plants 

 capable of cultivation outdoors in England has been in- 

 creased in twenty years by about five thousand species 

 and varieties. 



^Ir. Beckett is a great authority on trees and shrubs, 

 the collection at Aldenham affords splendid facilities to 

 enable him to form an opinion on this question and so it 

 is quite possible that he is correct, but, personally we 

 are not yet quite convinced. 



::: ;}; ^ 



Some time ago, on this page, attention was directed to 

 some unusual common names for plants, and "Welcome- 

 home-husband-be-you-ever-so-drunk" was cited as being 

 the acme of unusualness. At that time the scientific name 

 of the plant was unknown and the wish was expressed 

 that someone might be able to enlighten the writer. Our 

 trip to England indirectly led to the discovery of the cor- 

 rect name of this mysterious plant. On our return we 

 found a book by W. H. Hudson, "A Shepherd's Life," 

 which is concerned largely with the natural history of 

 Salisbury Plain and the Wiltshire downs. It was, of 

 course, read with intensified interest because of our visit 

 to the region with which it deals. Great was our aston- 

 ishment and delight on coming across a paragraph in 

 which reference is made to the name, slightlv different 

 it is true, that had excited considerable speculation con- 

 cerning the plant to which it could rightly be applied. 

 The sentence in which it occurs may we'll be quoted. 

 Hudson is referring to the roofs of the cottages on 

 Salisbury Plain: "They are grown over with yellow 

 stooecrop, that bright, cheerful flower that smiles down 

 at you from the lowly roof above the door, with such 

 an inviting expression, so delighted to see you no matter 

 how poor and worthless a person you may be or what 

 mischief you may have been at, that- you begin to un- 



139 



