4 THE ROSE GARDEN. 



assume new forms and tints, hence arise individuals differing from their parents. 

 These are commonly termed varieties ; and he bestows names on such of them 

 as he deems improvements on former kinds, and therefore worthy of public notice. 



But the Florist does more than this. He does not rest satisfied with the simple 

 workings of nature. Her march is too slow for him. He strives to anticipate her. 

 He brings together varieties of different species, and, hybridizing them, he 

 effects new combinations — produces new races*; the individuals of which differ 

 more widely in appearance, and which may eventually become so numerous, as to 

 induce him to group them, that they may be the more readily comprehended. 

 To accomplish this end, he seizes hold of external characters, — whether it be the 

 colours of the flowers, as in Carnations, &c, or the general appearance of the 

 plant, as in Roses, — and forms a system of arrangement of his own ; — not strictly 

 botanical, perhaps, but popular and useful. Such is the origin of the Floricultural 

 Groups. As to the differences between these groups, we shall point out, as we 

 approach each one, the characters which distinguish it from all others. 



Now, it will be tolerably evident, that, to be able to group varieties correctly, 

 some practice among Roses, combined with previous study, is necessary. If an 

 individual wish to become sufficiently acquainted with Roses to enable him to do 

 this, I would say, let him first study the features of the species from which the 

 Florist's groups have descended. Let the groups be considered next ; then the 

 varieties; which, though ever so variously hybridized, will for the most part be 

 readily understood. A hybrid may sometimes be met with, whose place it may at 

 first sight be difficult to determine ; but in such case a second or third inspection, 

 and a little reflection, usually solve the difficulty. To illustrate this remark, let us 

 suppose the existence of a variety due to the hybridizing of a Damask with a 

 Hybrid Provence Rose. The Hybrid Provence being a hybrid between the 

 French and the Provence, such variety might partake of the nature of both these 

 species, and also of the Damask parent. These are, on the authority of most 

 Botanists, three distinct species. Well, supposing the features of each to be visible 

 in the new variety, where is the place for such a hybrid ? We would say, Is it 

 sufficiently original in character to demand the formation of a new group ? If so, 



* M. Deslongchamps, in his work on the Rose, devotes considerable space to a discussion on 

 the subject of raising Roses from seed, and especially in proving they vary from seed, without 

 being hybridized. What practical man has any doubt on the subject ? But with the same 

 stroke he endeavours to establish that the so-called hybrids are not really such ; — have not been 

 produced by the union of two distinct species, but by freaks of nature. In this, if he admits as 

 distinct species those plants which most Botanists do, he appears to me to fail absolutely : and he 

 admits that the authority of the French Rose growers, most of whom devote a great part of 

 their time to the raising of seedlings, is against him. M. Vibert, one of the oldest and most 

 distinguished cultivators in France, goes so far as to say that he obtained spotted Moss Roses by 

 crossing the spotted varieties of the Rcsa Gallica with the Moss kinds. The plants produced from 

 this experiment partook unmistakeably of the characters of each parent, and differed from all 

 pre-existing kinds. The Rosa Hardii is another case in point, raised from between R. berbe- 

 riifolia and R. involucrata. Is there any mistake here ? 



