DIAGEAMS OP THE " GARDENERS MAGAZINE OF BOTANY." 77 



nut of a calyx the size of a ladfs thimble. If these had appeared 

 before the trial exhibitions, surely there would have been just cause for 

 our northern friends disclaiming the southern model of a perfect 

 Picotee. ' Save us from our friends.' ' 



Now, sir, it may be raising a " nobody " into importance to notice 

 this rigmarole, but the Midland Florist is read by persons who know 

 nothing of the writer, and the great majority of readers look upon 

 what is in a work as the opinions of the editor, although nothing can 

 be a much greater mistake. As the writer in question assumes to dic- 

 tate in matters he does not even understand, and this dictation may 

 appear the dictation of the work itself, I will offer a few words upon 

 the dictatorial manner in which the writer would propagate his own 

 blunders. The author of " The Properties of Flowers and Plants" 

 avowed, ten years ago, that, in contradistinction to all who had touched 

 upon the subject, he had set models ivhich never ivill be attained, but 

 which would he the most perfect and beautiful form that the flower 

 could possess if it could be attained; therefore that flower which comes 

 nearest must be the best. Now, after this avowal in the work itself, 

 and made by the author in public meetings and in lectures, what comes 

 of this would-be-dictator's discovery that it never tvill be attained. 

 " I venture to say," observes Sir Oracle ; what venture was there in 

 saying that which the very author of the " Model "lhad previously 

 announced as the groundwork of his " Properties of Flowers? " But 

 when he adds, " for this very simple reason, the petals in the same tier 

 are of two widths," and warrants nature never commits such freaks, he 

 must forget that nature does not one time in fifty condescend to place 

 the petals in tiers at all, and not unfrequently pokes even one of the 

 guard petals in the centre of the flower. But I shall not quibble on 

 straws — the petals are not of two different tvidths ; it is simply an 

 untruth ; but it would not alter the case. The author does not antici- 

 pate that nature can come up to his models, and therefore the writer's 

 warrantry about what nature will or will not do, however silly and 

 presumptuous it may be, was perfectly uncalled for. When this very 

 sapient gentleman says, " We have more perfect models in actual flowers 

 at the present day," it is a wanton and unjustifiable misrepresentation, 

 and a writer ought to be ashamed of resorting to such means for the 

 sake of a little (unenviable) notoriety. I have conversed with hundreds 

 of better florists than the writer can be — for no good florist would so 

 commit himself— and I have never met with one who Mould deny that 

 the models laid down in the " Properties of Flowers and Plants " would 

 be perfection, if attained, but that to attain them would be impos- 

 sible. Ilollyoak's Duke of Rutland is a fine flower, as flowers go, but 

 the man who will deny that it would be better with two or three more 

 tiers of petals — I am not talking now about what nature may or may 

 not do — must be no florist ; and he who denies that it would be im- 

 proved if the petals formed a more complete circle can be no judge. 

 This would-be florist dictator must also have his fling at the uniformity 

 of the petals forming a rosette, but when I once see a florist's flower 

 too mechanically true, I may be inclined to listen to such ridiculous 

 objections. Now, with regard to the number of tiers and petals, seven 



