168 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



t August 20, 1874. 



viouB year. Madame Lacharme seemed to me the beet, and I 

 am glad to find that " D." can so confidently state it is a good 

 second Lloomer. The best of the 1872 Roses were Pierre 

 Seletsky, Mrs. Veitch and Marius Cote, both of them some- 

 what alike, of the Antoine Dacber style, and Reine Victoria, a 

 soft pink, but chiefly good for pillars, as it is a Bourbon. I 

 thought Claude Levet, Pierre Seletsky, MacMahou, Madame 

 Moreau (the second, by the way, of this name), all either poor 

 or doubtful; and even after making allowance for the diy 

 season and the hot suns which were scorching Roses at that 

 time, I do not believe any Rose of 1872, except Madame 

 Lacharme, will last long in nursery lists. 



Of older kinds — Abbe Brammerel, good as a garden Rose, is 

 far too flat and rough for exhibition ; Andre Dunand was 

 blooming very freely ; Baroune Louis UxkuU good, but I think 

 it is too much extolled ; Charlotte Corday and Charles Mar- 

 gottin were doing well, so were Henri Pages and Louise Corbet. 

 Many of the whites of the Mdlle. Bounaire type are very much 

 ahke, as Madame Noman, Madame Liabaud, Madame Freeman, 

 and Virginal. The whites, in fact, seem divided into two 

 types : one like Boule de Neige, Baronne de Maynard, and 

 Madame Gustavo Bonnet of the Noisette type, and the other 

 of the H.P. type, inclined to a blush centre, as Vii'ginal. 

 Richard Wallace and President Thiers disappointed me ; the 

 first was too hard in the bud, the second not so good as 

 Countess of Oxford, which it somewhat resembles. Marquise 

 de Mortemart was exceedingly pretty, though too flat, but the 

 freshness of the newly-opening buds very beautiful. No Rose 

 seems improving much more than Marquise de Castellane ; it 

 is good in habit and constitution, and will be sure to firmly 

 establish itself with such well-known Roses as Charles Lefebvre, 

 Alfred Colomb, Marie Baumaun, La France, &a. Among very 

 dark ones, Monsieur de Pontbrian was promising, with a very 

 fiery centre, and Maxime de la Rocheterie would do were it not 

 eo flat. 



These few remarks on Roses are very desultory, it is to be 

 feared. I am glad " D." speaks so highly of S. Reynolds Hole. 

 I have hitherto been afraid there was not suflicient size or 

 substance for one to be called after the Rose king. Annie 

 Laxton deserves all the praise he has given it ; but I doubt if 

 Bessie Johnson is as good as Abel Grand, from which it is a 

 sport, and to which it has a tendency to revert. 



The Roses at Mr. Smith's are all pinched back when making 

 their first growth from the bud, so as to secure good and sym- 

 metrical heads ; and in spite of the adverse season, the plants 

 were looking healthy and well. The old-established sorts, as 

 Gloire de Dijon, Mareehal Niel, Alfred Colomb, John Hopper, 

 Ac, were grown in great quantities, and the number of rows of 

 eacla variety formed a test of public opinion with regard to them. 



I cannot understand on what grounds Mr. Radclyffe praises 

 up Edward Morren so much. I know it has occasionally a 

 good bloom, but it is a rare exception ; it is generally rough 

 and coarse. Nor, again, why he should in 18G(5 designate 

 Felix Genero and Madame Margottin first-rate, and call Annie 

 Wood, Black Prince, Monsieur Noman, Princess Mary of Cam- 

 bridge very good, as though inferior to the other two, whereas 

 any one of the last four is better than the other two. I know 

 he gave his iiat once in favour of Felix Genero, and I ventured 

 to doubt it, since which Felix Genero is always brought to 

 the front by Mr. Radclyffe in any list he gives. I see occa- 

 sionally good bloom=, and it is useful in a stand as a contrast 

 to others. What is there, again, to recommend in Madame 

 Masson ? Dull in colour, coarse, aud flat. Why, again, omit 

 such Roses as La Franco and Maiio Baumann, and put in 

 Madame Grey ton and Thyra Hammerick? Well, I suppose 

 opinions about Roses always will differ, but when we have 

 Roses good in form and shape and colour, we do not want to 

 go back to old flat, uneven, and ragged Roses, nor to adopt 

 newer ones like Maxime de la Rocheterie, Vicomtesse de Vezins, 

 and Abbe Brammerel, even though they be good in colour. 



While on the subject of Roses, I do not think Mr. Camm 

 need be afraid of quantity ousting quality at our English Rose 

 shows. Masses of Roses shown as at a French show (as I 

 saw last year, brought in tumbled together iu hampers and 

 baskets, and put into lumps of wet clay and rows of claret 

 bottles) will not suit the English taste. We want perfection 

 in bloom, and good opportunity to compare the varieties. 



I can sympathise with Mr. Camm in the loss of his Peaches. 

 Naturally I think them a good fruit, worth all the pains to 

 cultivate. I recommend him a 2-feet glass copiug and Notting- 

 ham net strained in front well off the wall, and kept on till 

 the first week in June. The same treatment, with plenty of 



guano water at the root, suits Maruchal Niel to perfection, and 

 I hope that his clerical friends may once more pay him their 

 annual visit under the united influence of Peaches and Roses. 

 I should have liked to have added more about Mr. Smith's 

 nurseries, but they have already been well described in your 

 pages. Suffice it to say that they will well repay a visit by 

 anyone who is interested in almost any branch of horticulture, 

 but more especially, I might say, they excel in fruit trees, there 

 being nearly fifty acres devoted to trained trees, bushes, es- 

 paliers, &c., of aU the best kinds of Apples, Pears, Plums, 

 Peaches, Nectarines, and houses full of young Vines, &c. Mr. 

 Richard Smith, too, has collected a most interesting variety of 

 Oaks, aud has also a wonderful collection of Acers of all forma 

 and colour, including all the newer varieties of Japanese 

 Maples. The nurseries, 150 to IfiO acres in extent, are well 

 and fully stocked with young plants from one end to another, 

 and the long centre avenue planted with every variety of 

 evergreen, and dotted with interesting deciduous shrubs, is 

 quite unique in its way. However, it is not my intention, 

 as I said to begin with, to attempt to give any adequate 

 description of the nurseiies. I have only written these few 

 notes, being induced to do so by the remarks made on Roses 

 in the last number of your Journal, as, though mine are de- 

 sultory, I thought they might interest some of your readers. 

 — C. P. P. 



MADAME LACHARME KOSE. 



I AM delighted to read iu " our Journal " this week that my 

 friend "D.fDeal," thinks so highly of this Rose. I had de- 

 termined not to bud a single stock with it this year, but as 

 I have all my Manettis to work, I will give "Madame La- 

 charme another trial. I speak, as my friend does, from what 

 I have seen here and elsewhere. Neither in my own garden 

 nor in the nurseries of Messrs. Cranston, Keynes, and Walters 

 have I seen a good bloom of this variety, nor indeed has it 

 been my good fortune to see one at any Rose show. With 

 regard to Souvenir de John Gould Veitch, I saw some blooms at 

 Salisbury which delighted me. The Rose is rather like Charles 

 Lefebvre, but not of so velvety a texture. It reminded me 

 very much of Mr. Paul's best, in my opinion, novelty — Wilson 

 Saunders. But we require to work a new Rose, which has a 

 good reputation, for a season or two before we can pronounce 

 any judgment worth recording. 



i am glad to see that " D., Deal," agrees with me in con- 

 demning the remainder of last year's novelties. I am sur- 

 prised at Mr. RadclyO'e's sticking to such Roses as Baronne 

 Prevost, William Griifiths, Alexandrine Bachmeteff, and a 

 host of other utterly useless varieties. Year after year he 

 writes to you recommending Baron Chaurand as one of the very 

 best dark Roses, aud yet I can confidently say that I have 

 never seen that Rose exhibited, and 1 do not know of a single 

 large grower who cultivates it. Allow me to congratulate Mr. 

 Radclyffe on giving up Madame Chirard. I went through his 

 iuteresting list, each second expecting to meet the Madame, 

 but she appears to have disappeared at last even from the 

 garden of her one-solitary though staunch friend. 



If such Roses as I have named above, and some others 

 mentioned in Mr. Radclyfl'o's letter, as Pierre Seletsky, Madame 

 Louise Carique, Madame Campbell, and Baronne Pelletan de 

 Kinkelin are " the living dogs," then I prefer " the dead lions." 

 There is one thing to be said about these Uving dogs — I know 

 of no kennels whence they can be purchased. — John B. M. Camm. 



THE FLOB DE ISABEL— BARKERIA 

 SPEOTABILIS. 



This genus contains but few species, but all of them are 

 beautiful ; in general appearance they resemble Epidendrums, 

 and, indeed, saving the broadly-winged column, there is Uttle 

 to separate them from that genus. 



The plant in question, as well as the other species which 

 belong to this family, do not, I am sorry to say, receive that 

 amount of attention at the hands of the amateur Orchid- 

 grower which they merit. Not that I would infer that they are 

 troublesome members, and require an extra amount of care, 

 but one sees them reaUy so seldom, even iu collections devoted 

 to " cool Orchids," to which Barkerias essentially belong, 

 that it becomes quite a matter of surprise. True, these plants 

 must be grown in a particular manner ; again, they are deci- 

 duous, which has no doubt led in a great measure to theii' 

 neglect, for without leaves they are not peculiarly ornamental 



