March «J, 187C. ] 



JOURNAL OP HOBTICULTUBE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



185 



of good proportion ; paste circular, substantial ; eye light 

 yellow; anthers hidden. Foliage smooth, handsome, evenly- 

 mealed. First-rate trasaer." And we have had nothing since 

 then to displace it. Heap's Smiling Beauty was in cultivation 

 then. Moreover, as a general rule it is not so flat as Glory, 

 and there is a dash of grey in the edge which takes away from 

 the perfect whiteness which distinguishes Glory. We hear 

 faint echoes from the north of other flowers which are to beat 

 those we have, but we may at any rate hold our judgment in 

 suspense. I find that George Levick, for instance, which is 

 said by some to beat George Lightbody, has had doubts thrown 

 on its pre-eminence by no less an authority than the Rev. J. 

 Tymons, a first-rate grower. 



It is a mystery to me that this lovely flower should have so 

 almost entirely gone out of cultivation in the south, while in 

 the north it still holds its own. There died the other day at 

 Shirley near Southampton one whom I remember well in days 

 long since past — Mr. Ginger — as amongst a coterie of growers of 

 whom John Dickson of Acre Lane, Brixton, wf&a fucile 2)rlnceps, 

 and now the fingers of one hand are enough to enumerate all 

 of us in the south of England. I am sure it is a fallacy to 

 enppose that Auriculas are difficult to manage. There are some 

 kinds, doubtless, which are miffy and slow to increase, or else 

 why after sixty years should Booth's Freedom be almost extinct, 

 and Page's Champion, Taylor's Glory, and Leigh's Col. Taylor 

 be so difficult to obtain ;' But these are exceptions. Such 

 kinds as Waterhouse's Conqueror, Headly's George Lightbody 

 and Charles Edward Brown, Lightbody's Richard Headly, 

 Cheetham's Lancashire Hero, Campbell's Lord Palmerston 

 and Pizarro, Masters's Mrs. Stiirrock and Eclipse, and many 

 others are not only not difficult to grow, but readily increase. 

 ■They require care, no doubt, but so does everything that is to 

 be done well ; but they will amply repay all the care that may 

 be bestowed on them. I have digressed a good deal from my 

 own culture in this rambling paper, but love for the flower 

 must be my excuse. — D., Dfal, 



KOSES. 



On page 131 Mr. Camm gives a very melancholy account of 

 own-root Roses, and the time taken to grow them. My experi- 

 ence in growing Roses from cuttings differs very considerably 

 from Mr. Camm's. Before going further I must state that the 

 soU of my garden is a deep sandy loam, and that my latitude 

 is a few miles south of London. 



At the end of September or beginning of October the cuttings 

 from lipe wood are carefully prepared, and planted in rows in 

 one of the most open plots in the garden without manure. By 

 the following February it will be found that each cutting has 

 formed a mass of incipient roots round its base. The plants 

 must now be kept from the drying influence of sun and wind 

 by hurdles and mats. Should the young shoots at the top be 

 allowed to flag, the tender roots will be injured and the plants 

 die. They must be frequently watered in dry weather. When 

 well rooted the covers may be removed, but the watering must 

 be kept up. 



By adopting the above treatment the majority of my cuttings 

 have made good plants by the following summer, and have 

 afforded an abundance of blooms, and by October they will 

 have made strong shoots, many of them over .S feet long. In 

 November the best are planted — with a good ball of mould 

 round a mass of fibrous roots — into the Rose beds, and those 

 that would make "weary work" in forming good bushes are 

 consigned to the rubbish heap. Those planted out are severely 

 pruned early in the following spring, and form fine plants 

 during the summer. Some sorts succeed better than others ; 

 such hardy kinds at Charles Lefebvre, John Hopper, Victor 

 Verdier, Comtesse d'Osford, Madame Victor Verdier, &o., 

 seldom fail. 



I believe one cause of disappointment is planting the slips 

 in the shade, as recommended by many. To keep them damp 

 and in the shade, in the spring when commencing to throw out 

 their tender roots is necessary, but when the roots are safe a 

 shady corner is the worst possible place for a Rose nursery. 

 It will take a long time to make strong plants in such a posi- 

 tion, therefore I consider it much better to plant the slips in a 

 plot selected for its exposure to the sun, and to give water and 

 shade when required. I find that short slips often fail in con- 

 sequence of their making growth on one side only, and conse- 

 quently dying on the other. 



As to the proper time for putting-in the cuttings there is a 

 great deal in the remaiks of " Fhilanthes," who, in the Journal 



for July 29th, 1875, reoommends the summer. Immediately 

 after my reading his opinion I wont into the garden to give 

 the plan a fair trial, but unfortunately was too late to find 

 many ripe stems that had not thrown out side shoots ; how- 

 ever, I found a few, and they were soon cut-up and in the 

 ground, and protected from a scorching sun by cabbage leaves. 

 All these were well rooted by the autumn, and had made 

 short shoots, which remained healthy all the winter, notwith- 

 standing the severe frost. They appear ready for a good start 

 this spring, and I believe will be quite a success. This year I 

 intend to make my slips as soon as the first blossoms are 

 over and before the second growth commences, and if space 

 will be granted in " our Journal " I will report the results. 



It wUl at once be seen that very few cuttings can be obtained 

 in summer compared with those that can be made from the 

 numerous strong shoots ripe in the autumn ; but I think that 

 the success of the summer cuttings, and the small amount of 

 trouble they give, will be found to compensate for this 

 deficiency. 



The question has been raised as to whether the quality of 

 the blooms from plants on their own roots differ from those 

 grown on the Manetti roots. On this point I should like 

 further information, and hope that the readers of the Journal 

 of Horticulture will have the benefit of the experience of those 

 who grow Roses in both ways, and at the same time it will be 

 important to know what soil the plants are grown in. As to 

 the difference in the trouble caused by planting cuttings on the 

 one hand and budding on Manetti stocks on the other, the 

 two processes are not to be compared. A hundred cuttings 

 can be prepared and planted in a very short time, but I am 

 afraid to say how long it takes to bud the same number of 

 Manetti stocks, leaving out the question of raising the stocks. 



I once read in a newspaper of a man who for some offence 

 was sentenced to three months hard labour. The man so 

 sentenced, replied: "Thank you, sir, I can do that little job 

 on my head." Now, I suppose it is men with this peculiarity 

 of being able to work in the above-named position who are 

 hired at the nurseries to bud Roses on Manetti stocks. The 

 man has to remain on the surface of the earth while he care- 

 fully performs a delicate operation below that surface. I have 

 so budded a few every season for some years past, and I must 

 confess that I do not like it. Yet I must say that I would 

 willingly go through the work and much more for the queen 

 of flowers it the question of quality should be decided in favour 

 of Manettis.— W. G. 



A NEW CLASSIFICATION OF APPLES. 



BY EGBERT HOGG, LL.D., F.L.S. 



I OFFER this system of classification with a consciousness 

 that, like every other which has been proposed, it is not perfect. 

 No system is perfect, and so long as science continuej to ad- 

 vance with such rapid steps the founders of systems must 

 change and advance also. It was my wish to have published 

 it in the last edition of my Fruit Manual, and the printing of 

 that work was delayed so long in the hope that 1 should have 

 been able to have done so that I was compelled to go to press 

 with it before I had brought my classification to a state which 

 was satisfactory to myself. I should have preferred post- 

 poning the publication of it even now tUl I had spent more time 

 on the application of its principles, and thereby proved the cor- 

 rectness of my views ; but some friends, whose opinion I esteem 

 very highly, urged its publication, and I have consented in 

 the hope that, now it is in the hands of the public, they also 

 wUl have an opportunity of applying its principles, and thereby 

 assist me in making it more perfect and complete than it is at 

 present. 



One of the greatest difficulties pomologists have had to 

 contend with is the want of a classification of the varieties of 

 Apples and Pears by which they can ascertain the names of 

 varieties in the same way as the botanist is enabled to discover 

 the name of a plant when it is unknown to him. Every other 

 kind of fruit has up to the present been arranged according to 

 characters, which are sufficiently distinct and permanent to 

 make the classification of real service ; but of the Apple and 

 the Pear there is none which can be worked with any kind of 

 assurance that it will lead to the desired result. It is not that 

 no attempts have been made to form a classification. On the 

 contrary, Diel, Dochnahl, and Lucas have each produced one, 

 each of which is a modification or altered form of the other ; 

 but the characters upon which they are based are to my mind 

 too varying and not sufficiently apparent to render them bo 



