i So THE ENGLISH FLOWER GARDEN. 



the standards did not " associate " with other shrubs, and so it came 

 about that all the standards grafted were placed in the rosery and 

 there held up their buds to the frost ! The nomenclature, too, in 

 use among Rose-growers by which Roses that flower the shortest 

 time were given the name of Hybrid Perpetuals has had some- 

 thing to do with the absence of the Rose from the flower garden. 

 Shows, too, have had a bad effect on the Rose in the garden, where 

 it is many times more important than as a show flower. The whole 

 aim of the man who shows Roses, and who is too often followed as 

 a leader, was to get a certain number of large flowers grown on the 

 Dog Rose, Manetti, or any stock which enabled him to get this at 

 the least cost ; so, if we go to any Rose-showing friend, we shall 

 probably find his plants for show grown in the kitchen garden 

 with a deep bed of manure on the surface of the beds, and as 

 pretty as so many broomsticks. This idea of the Rose as a 

 show flower leads to the cultivation of Roses that have not a 

 high value as garden flowers, and Roses that do not open their 

 flowers well in our country in the open air, and are not really worth 

 growing, are grown because they happen to produce flowers now and 

 then that look well on a show bench. So altogether the influence 

 of the shows has been against the Rose as a garden flower, and a 

 cause why large gardens are, in the flower garden, quite bare of the 

 grace of the queen of flowers. 



THE ROSE NOT A "DECORATIVE" PLANT! It is instructive 

 to study the influence of rose books upon the Rose as well as 

 that of the Rose exhibitions, as they brought about an idea that 

 the Rose was not a "decorative" plant in the language of recent 

 days. In these books it was laid down that the Rose did not 

 associate properly with other flowers, and it was therefore better to 

 put it in a place by itself, and, though this % false idea had less 

 influence in the cottage garden, it did harm in all large gardens. 

 In a recent book on the Rose, by Mr. Foster-Melliar, we read : 



I look upon the plant in most cases only as a means whereby I may obtain 

 glorious Roses. I do not consider the Rose pre-eminent as a decorative plant ; 

 several simpler flowers, much less beautiful in themselves, have, to my mind, 

 greater value for general effect in the garden, and even the blooms are, I imagine, 

 more difficult to arrange in water for artistic decoration than lighter, simpler, and 

 less noble flowers. 



It must be remembered that the Rose is not like a bedding plant, which will 

 keep up continual masses of colour throughout the summer, but that the flush of 

 flowers is not for more than a month at most, after which many sorts, even of the 

 Teas will be off bloom for a while, and the general effect will be spoiled. 



This is not a statement peculiar to the author as he is only em- 

 bodying here the practice and views of the Rose exhibitors which most 



