m 



NEW INTRODUCTIONS AND SPECIAL 



CLASSES 



IT is better to keep new roses entirely separate 

 from the main lists of varieties which have been 

 thoroughly tested. Occasionally a new rose shows 

 enough value to stamp it at once as worth while, 

 but the vast majority are worthless. The ones which 

 are mentioned hereafter are treated most conserva- 

 tively, yet some have stood out as possessing merit, 

 and others cannot yet be eliminated. Any one who 

 plants untried varieties will find that, with few ex- 

 ceptions, they will not be worth cultivation. 



ADMIRAL WARD; Hybrid Tea; Pernet-Ducher, 1915. Crimson 

 red, shaded with fiery red and velvety purple. Named after the well- 

 known rosarian. Beautiful color and form, and undoubtedly will 

 be a fine collector's rose. Has not yet shown sufficient growth or 

 blooming qualities to be included in the best of the reds. 



CHEERFUL; Hybrid Tea; McGredy & Son. 1915. Pure orange 

 flame, with distinct orange yellow base. Attractive color; fair 

 growth and foliage. Worth watching. 



CLEVELAND; Hybrid Tea; Hugh Dickson, 1916. Coppery yellow 

 at base of petals, which are heavily flushed reddish copper on old 

 rose. Beautiful color: quite good form; mild fragrance; only shows 

 fair growth. Tested Jor one year, and cannot yet be classed in the 

 list of dependable varieties. 



COMTESSE DE RAPELis ST. SAUVEURj Hybrid Tea; Leenders, 

 1916. Reddish orange shaded coral red. Shows good growth; good 

 foliage; good blooming qualities; undoubtedly only a decorative 

 rose; semi-double, being little better than single; rather an attractive 

 color. 



GOLDEN MEYER; Hybrid Tea; Paul & Son, 1915. Golden yellow. 

 Good light-colored rose; not yet showing enough growth to be seri- 

 ously considered. 



105 



