586 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
{ November 21, 1878. 
place some oid barrels, boxes, large drain tiles, or flower pots 
oyer the crowns and cover the whole with a good quantity of hot 
dung and old leaves. Care should be taken when the coyver- 
jiags are finally removed that the plants do not receive a severe 
check, or it may injure them for some years. When the roots 
are lifted to force we seldom plant them again, as a new stock 
of fine plants can always be secured by dividing old roots in 
spring and planting them out in good soil—A KITCHEN 
GARDENER. 
DRESSING CARNATIONS. 
HAVING been an exhibitor for many years of various kinds 
of flowers I may perhaps be allowed to make a few remarks on 
the above subject. Is it right for an exhibitor to dress his Car- 
nations or other flowers for exhibition? My own opinion is 
decidedly ‘“‘yes.’”’ provided that first there is no rule of the 
society infringed in so doing; and secondly, that the dressing 
consists merely of the removal of a blemish or the skilful 
arrangement of the petals of the flower, so as to show it to the 
best advantage. 
“D.,” and also my friend “ WyYLpD SAVAGE” object. They 
say first that dressing is unnatural and artificial, and second 
that it gives one exhibitor an undue advantage over another. 
As to the first objection, that it is “unnatural and artificial,” 
is not the production of a show flower from beginning to end 
artificial, and in one sense unnatural? Whoever yet expected 
to cut a show Rose by leaving his bushes to take care of them- 
selves? Are not budding, manuring, pruning, thinning out 
the shoots, disbudding, shading, supporting, and training all 
artificial? Ifthe exhibitor may not arrange the petals of his 
flower to advantage, why may he arrange the branches of his 
plants? I have never yet heard “ WyLp SAVAGE” or “D.” 
cry out against the marvellously trained pot Roses of Turner 
or Paul, and yet what would they be if every shoot, bud, and 
flower were not kept in place in an unnatural way by arti- 
ficial means? They hold up their hands with horror because 
Mr. Douglas takes a few hours dressing his Carnations. Is 
there nothing to be said of those who spend not hours only but 
days, weeks, and years in the production of a specimen plant ? 
If we must let Nature alone to arrange the petals of her 
flowers for show, would it not be equally reasonable to demand 
that she should be allowed to train herself into shape when 
plants are concerned? In fact the objection will not hold 
water. 
A show flower isa flower grown by artificial means and shown 
by artificial means—a proof that Nature has been assisted and 
yet thwarted—a triumph of the gardener’s art over the “ WYLD 
SAVAGE” tendencies of Nature on the one hand, and a skil- 
ful taking advantage of its kindly efforts and capabilities on 
the other. As to the third objection—that it gives one ex- 
hibitor an undue advantage over another, and quite right too 
say I. Is a man not to reap the fruit of his skill? He has 
assisted Nature and overcome Nature in the growth of his 
flower. Why not let him alone to assist her in the perfect 
arrangement of the petals and to obliterate the trace of the 
thorny and thistly side of Nature, which exists more or less in 
all her productions, eyen in a blossom? If he can do this by 
honest and legitimate means well and good; he deserves to 
win. But—and here comes the pinch—let him, say I, do it 
himself. Theshow bench is, it seems to me, a test of individual 
skill, and it is no more fair for the exhibitor to import external 
aid in dressing his flowers than it is to import flowers from a 
neighbour’s garden or to gum the petals of one flower into 
another. 
Mr. Douglas says that the system of florists helping one 
another tends to promote good fellowship. Well, that may be 
so in cases where they are well known to each other and the 
skill of the opponents is nearly equal. I can quite understand 
Mr. Douglas and Mr. Simonite lending each other a helping 
hand, but one must not forget that there are often aspirants to 
fame cropping up at the shows who labour under the disadyan- 
tage of not knowing their fellow exhibitors, and under the still 
greater disadvantage of unskilfulness in the usual artifices of 
the florist. Such naturally feel aggrieved. An element is in- 
troduced into the competition for which they were not pre- 
pared. They find out to their dismay that it is one thing to 
be able to grow a good flower and another thing to be able to 
show it. They haye patiently acquired sufficient knowledge 
for the first, but are all at sea when it comes to the second. 
Is it to be wondered at that when they see two or three skilled 
dressers engaged in transforming a stand of flowers into show 
| trim and are unable to do it themselves or to obtain help. that 
they feel that an unfair advantage is being gained over them? 
| This being so allow me to suggest a remedy. Let there bea 
tule inserted in the schedules of the various societies that ex- 
hibitors or their gardeners must dress and set up their own 
flowers without assistance, and that any infringement of this 
regulation will disqualify. 
Finally, that Mr. Rudd once showed a Carnation which did 
not need dressing and won is no proof that the generality of 
Carnations do not need it. Almost all flowers need a little 
manipulation of some sort to show them off to the best ad- 
vantage, and no one was more surprised than I to hear that 
“WYLD SAVAGE’S” Roses all grow with stiff backs, so that 
they do not need the artificial assistance of wires to aid them 
to hold their heads up, and petals so beautifully arranged that 
they can without exception be shown as cut from the tree. 
—Rh. W. BEACHEY. 
J HAVE read attentively the various remarks in your Journal 
on dressing Carnations. As probably I am one of the oldest 
florists in England, being within a few weeks of eighty-one 
years old, and as I commenced growing florists’ flowers in 1812, 
| I have witnessed the great improvement in all descriptions. 
My first essay was in Pinks, then Auriculas, Polyanthuses, 
Tulips, Carnations, and Picotees. At one time I grew upwards 
of six thousand Tulips, a thousand Auriculas, upwards of a 
thousand Polyanthuses, and in Carnations and Picotees up- 
wards of five hundred pots, besides a large quantity in beds. 
In 1830 the Picotee was striped at the edges, and in a few 
years John’s Prince Albert was raised, which became the 
original parent of all the fine sorts now grown. At that period 
Carnations and Picotees had to undergo the operation of dress- 
ing as well as Pinks and Auriculas. I well remember nearly 
sixty years ago I lost a first prize through my dresser cracking 
a petal in one of my Auriculas. I never knew a flower being 
staged without being operated upon : even Tulips had to sub- 
mit to the pencilling in removing any dirt that might by flies 
have been soiled. I once wrote an article against cards being 
used to support the petals, but now I feel persuaded that the 
cards tend to improve the appearance of the blooms.—JOHN 
SLATER, Late of Cheetham Hill, Manchester. 
GARDEN POTATOES. 
It is well known that our best and most profitable Potatoes, 
although adapted for field culture on a large scale, are not as 
a rule the varieties to grow in rich garden soil, as their charac- 
ter for flavour and solidity generally becomes impaired at the 
cost of increased size. Bearing this in view a few years ago 
I consulted that eminent authority Mr. R. Fenn as to which 
was the best general-crop Potato for an amateur to grow in 
the rich old humus of a town garden; and acting on his some- 
what qualified advice—for he honestly would not recommend 
thoroughly either the old Lapstone or his own handsome and 
high-quality Potato Rector of Woodstock for great productive- 
ness—I tried these, and in addition upwards of one hundred 
other sorts without being able to obtain all I desired. 
For flavour and appearance the Rector was unapproach- 
able, and amongst the best of the others were the old Early 
Oxford, which when obtained true is short-topped, and al- 
though it comes in early, continues in use until April or May. 
It is also tolerably fertile and otherwise a good Potato, but it 
is almost impossible to obtain it true now. 
Another excellent Potato, but coming into use somewhat 
later, is the Oxfordshire Kidney. It is of fine quality and a 
handsome and prolific sort, but in flayour it is not equal either 
to Lapstone or Rector of Woodstock. 
I believe, however, now that the right Potato is forthcoming 
in Lady Godiva, raised by the Rey. Mr. Kittoe of Birmingham, 
which seems to combine all the requisites for an amateur’s 
garden and a gentleman’s table, with fair size and productive- 
ness. Through the kindness of Mr. R. Gilbert I haye been 
enabled to see and taste it, and it is certainly a great advance 
upon the Lapstone in form and size. It is a handsome, pebble- 
shaped, equal-ended variety, skin smooth, and all the tubers 
appear even-sized ; the flesh and flavour are of the same type 
and quite equal to the Lapstone, which I look upon as the ne 
plus ultra Potato for auality. Lady Godiva, too, will become 
one of our best show sorts, as it is free from deep and surplus 
eyes, and in appearance is all that can be desired. I trust I 
may be able to secure it next year for trial in the Experi- 
mental. It will admirably follow Myatt’s Early Prolific alias 
