September 26, 1878. J 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 237 
In the forty-eight varieties 183 Roses have been named by 
forty-one electors, and in the seventy-two varieties 182 Roses 
by fourteen electors. Untabulated in the forty-eight varieties 
three other Roses also muster seven votes—viz., Princess Bea- 
trice, Général Jacqueminot, and the Lelia-Peyronny ; eight 
obtain six votes; twelve are mentioned five times, and here 
probably are to be found a few Roses that will hereafter take a 
higher position—to wit, Madame Prosper Langier, La Rosiére, 
and Mrs. Baker. Among the eight obtaining four votes Emily 
Laxton is found and Duc de Montpensier, one of these being a 
first-class vote. Nine Roses have but three votes, twenty-one 
are only named twice, whilst no fewer than fifty varieties have 
only a solitary vote. It may interest some to know how these 
fifty solitary votes are divided. These are probably the votes 
that greatly alter the position of the Roses by taking away a 
vote that would be given to some already in the list. Fourteen 
electors have named one, five have named two ; three electors 
nominate three, one names four, and two electors have no less 
than six. As regards the seventy-two varieties beyond those 
tabulated nine other Roses were voted for five times, twelve 
obtained four votes. ten were named thrice, twenty-four could 
only muster two votes, and out of fourteen electors no less than 
fifty-six Roses had but a solitary vote. The two lists side by 
side will make comparisons between them easy ; for instance, 
some of the Roses hold the same position in each list—Marie 
Baumann, Mons. E. Y. Teas, Marguerite Brassac. Others are 
widely different ; take for example Horace Vernet, which rises 
from No. 25 in the general to Ne. 11 in the 72, Beauty of 
Waltham from 46 to 31, Elie Morel from 70 to 45, this last 
being the most marked. As instances of the opposite Prince 
Camille de Rohan sinks from 41 to 62, Duke of Wellington 
from 29 to 47, and Comtesse d’Oxford from 15 to 32. Yet 
with these exceptional cases, was I not right in hazarding the 
}rophecy that the two lists would not greatly differ? They 
are the same with the exception of six Roses! Such a result 
does not, to my thinking, prove that the forty-one electors 
make up an opinion which in this case can be considered “a 
mockery, delusion, and snare.’ On the contrary, it plainly 
says that tried by two different tests we have for the present 
arrived at a fair solution of the best seventy-two varieties of 
exhibition Roses, and that any novice taking these seventy- 
two may hope that with the skill, science, soil, and climate 
necessary for success he may, selecting these, be moderately 
certain that his Roses, judged by exhibition standard will not 
disgrace him, at least in the selection ; on the contrary, if 
beaten in the struggle he may rest assured that it will not be 
chiefly by Roses outside of the charmed circle. 
Again I conclude the first portion. of the election by warmly 
thanking the electors for their lists, without which the election 
would be null and yoid. I thank them for myself, but I thank 
them still more cordially for readers of “our Journal’? who 
value the list and anxiously await its appearance. I also 
desire to thank many of the electors, to whom I am absolutely 
unknown, for the kind expressions of gratitude towards myself. 
I must again repeat that the correspondence connected with 
the election is great and occupies considerable time, and I 
therefore am unable to reply to these letters, but beg all my 
kind helpers to accept my thanks in this form. Of their kind 
opinion I am by no means ungrateful. Gratitude I have, time 
I lack.—JoserH Hinton, Warminster. 
P.S.—Perhaps this portion is scarcely complete without the 
names of the yoters. They are as follows :—Amateurs: Miss 
Penrice ; Revs. C. P. Peach, J. B. M. Camm, Bulmer, Pochin, 
Cheales, and Tomlinson ; Messrs. W. Palfrey, Mayo, Beachey, 
R. G. Baker, J. Smith, E. R. Whitwell, 1. B. Haywood, John 
Taylor, J. Graveley, James Brown, J. L. Curtis, Soames, 
G. Baker, A. J. Waterlow, Robert Craig, gardener to General 
the Hon. A. Upsten ; Capt. Christy, Hand, and Hinton. Nursery- 
men : Messrs. Balchin, Cant, Curtis, Dickson, Davison, Durbin, 
Frettingham, Keynes & Co., H. Merryweather, H. May, Mitchell, 
G. Paul & Son, G. Prince, Piper, Rumsey, and Turner.—J. H. 
PANSIES.—Vick’s “Illustrated Magazine” contains the follcw- 
ing sensible remarks on Pansies :—‘ Many persons seem to for- 
get that Pansies are imperfect perennials, and expect them to 
goon blooming year after year likea Paeony or a blue Flag. It 
is true they will live for several years, but they will not give 
large fine blossoms after the plants become old. The seed 
must be from selected plants and kept pure, or the flowers 
soon ‘run out,’ as the common saying is—that is, they become 
small and common-looking. So whatever else you save your- 
self or get from your neighbours never trust any Pansy seed 
but that from a reliable florist. But everything does not de- 
pend upon the seed, for it is possible to grow very poor flowers 
from the best seed by bad treatment ; but the best treatment 
will not produce fine flowers from poor seed.” 
NOTES ON FRUIT—ROOT-PRUNING AT ASHWELL 
RECTORY. 
You published last year a few observations of mine op the 
culture of Peaches and Nectarines in orchard houses. I spoke 
then of the very great importance of preventing, or, failing 
that, of stopping as soon as possible the ravages of insects, and 
also by means of cheap lamp stoves of providing just enough 
heat during the blossoming period to exclude the frost. It 
would be superfluous for me to expatiate now upon the ne- 
cessity of ripened wood for insuring next year’s crop, but 1 
may mention that it is my practice to shorten shoots as much 
as is consistent with prudence as soon as the fruit is gathered, 
so as toadmit as much air and light as possible upon what will 
be fruit-bearing wood next year. 
With regard to root-pruning, it may be interesting to some 
of your readers for me to state that last November, in order to 
check a too luxuriant growth, I determined to replant in fresh 
soil all my cordon trees along a wall about 130 feet in length. 
Some of these trees were triple, some double, and some single 
cordons, of which I prefer the last. It seemed not only an 
herculean toil but a rather hazardous experiment to dig up 
trees some of which were nearly twenty years of age, but as 
these “old uns” had gross shoots I made up my mind, whether: 
kill or cure, it should be done. I began by excavating a trench 
at one end of the border, undermining and carefully lifting 
each tree in turn, cutting-in its roots, and then immediately 
transplanting it in some fresh soil—the top spit of a meadow. 
And here I may remark, that with the trees planted in the 
border I alternate cordon trees in large pots ; and this I find 
to be a good plan, as giving freer scope to the roots. The 
result has been most satisfactory. I had some misgivings I 
must confess. I made up my mind fora short crop the next. 
year, but I expected that in the long run this heroic treatment 
would yield good results. It turns out, however, that my fears 
were perfectly groundless. My trees were full of blossom, 
nearly every blossom set (requiring some trouble in thinning), 
and fewer fruits than usual fell during the summer imma- 
turely. In fact, I have had a magnificent crop, not only amply 
providing for my own table, but also affording me the pleasur- 
able opportunity of making acceptable presents of fruit to 
my friends and neighbours. Dr. Johnson is said to have asked 
whether anybody ever yet had as much wall fruit as he 
desired. A lady who happened to be a guest of mine at the 
end of June told me that she had never had a sufficiency 
before, but that in my house she had enough and to spare. She: 
came in for the enjoyment of that most excellent Peach the 
Early Louise, which I can strongly recommend. It is a cling- 
stone, and so does not fall when ripe as so many of the early 
varieties do, and its flavour is exquisite. 
During a pleasant ramble in my short holidays I have had 
opportunities of comparing notes with brother amateurs, and, 
considering that the present was said to be a bad season I 
was surprised at the abundance I witnessed. In the garden 
of Borden Vicarage I saw wonderful produce of Apples, Pears, 
and Plums ; but alas ! the fine Peach trees with a too plentifuh 
crop upon them were ruined by the attacks of red spider. 
This part of Kent may well be called the garden of England. 
My next visit was to Horsham in Sussex, and there, both in 
the orchard house at the vicarage and in the extensive Peach 
houses of S. Lucas, Esq. (well worthy of a visit), I saw splendid. 
specimens of fruit, such as bore testimony not only to the 
richness of the soil, but also to the care and skill of the gar- 
deners in charge. I remarked some particularly fine Peaches 
on the Dymont Peach, also some grand Nectarines on the 
Victoria, which I am surprised to find is not included in the: 
list of Nectarines recommended by ‘A KITCHEN GARDENER ”” 
in your issue of the 12th inst. I can also speak in landatory 
terms of the samples of Peaches I saw and tasted in the 
orchard house of the vicar of Croydon, Surrey, who trains the 
branches of one or two trees beneath the glass of his house 
with remunerative results. His Grapes, his Plums, his Straw- 
berry plants, bis Roses, his Gladioli, in fact all that he takes 
pains to cultivate, have before this been deservedly commended 
in your Journal in a letter from “D., Deal.’ Of outdoor 
Peaches and Nectarines those that pleased me most were thos¢ 
