ON THE ROSE 



to which their species is subject is, therefore, one 

 of the prominent aims that I never overlook in the 

 course of experiments, no matter what the partic- 

 ular quality that may be chiefly sought. 



Therefore I make it the invariable rule, what- 

 soever the plant with which I am working, to 

 examine the seedlings attentively from time to 

 time, to note whether any of them give evidence 

 of infection by mildew or any fungous growth. 



And any seedling that is seen to be subject to 

 mildew is at once destroyed, regardless of the 

 value of its other qualities. 



I should not regard a plant experiment success- 

 ful that led to the production of the most beautiful 

 and most fragrant and most prolific of roses, if at 

 the same time the plant that exhibited these quali- 

 ties was susceptible to mildew. Indeed, I have 

 destroyed thousands of otherwise promising roses 

 for the simple reason that they were subject to 

 mildew. 



I have obtained scores of climbing roses that 

 were worthy to compete with the Crimson Rambler 

 or the Philadelphia Rambler and other standard 

 varieties, yet which have not been allowed to live 

 because of their susceptibility to disease. 



But the reward of this unflinching application 

 of a principle has resulted in various types of 

 roses that are quite generally mildew-proof. 



[53] 



