448 JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER, 
[ December 12, 1878. 
‘Anemones, Myosotis, Crocuses, Daisies, Primula and varieties, 
Aubrietias, Saxifrages, Tulips, &c. 
Messrs. Downie & Laird sent a nice pan for exhibition of the 
Sibthorpia europza variegata. Messrs. Dickson & Co. exhibited 
two stands of cut blooms of Chrysanthemums containing sixty- 
three varieties which included all the favourite kinds, and a fine 
bloom of Thunbergia laurifolia. Mr. John Webster exhibited a 
new seedling Apple named Beauty of Moray,-a culinary Apple, 
free bearer, and long keeper. 
FRAUD AT THE LIVERPOOL SHOW. 
Your reporter sent you a correct account of the above 
Show. Mr. Ollerhead in his letter in your contemporary only 
reported the black side, and left entirely out the notes taken 
in the early part of the day of the productions worthy of com- 
ment. We question very much if Chrysanthemums were ever 
shown in better condition, either in London or elsewhere, than 
those at St. George’s Hall on the 20th of last month, either 
trained plants or cut blooms. All interested in the Exhibition 
are truly sorry that a solitary instance of unfair exhibiting 
should have occurred, and express their deep regret that fraudu- 
lent blooms were brought to the Exhibition. The young man 
in question is a good grower, and from what we saw of his 
blooms only a few days prior to the Show he was well able to 
stand his own ground in the contest without any such trickery. 
To turn to another question, How came the Judges to pass 
such abnormal blooms and to give to them the first prize, 
and what is to be the guide for Judges? We are informed a 
stand of blooms (incurved varieties) with Fingal and Faust 
in the south of England would be disqualified; they are in- 
curved varieties, and were two of the finest blooms in the 
Show. Judges should be able to know each individual flower, 
its conditions and its qualities, before the awards are made. 
The fraternity in this neighbourhood cannot all be regarded 
as capable of fraud and trickery. 
The competition independent of the impostor’s blooms was 
good, and even after the blooms had been put two and three 
in one Mr. Tunnington’s were far superior, and I believe Mr. 
Ollerhead saw them before they were staged. We can point 
to Mr. Tunnington’s and Mr. Elliott’s blooms and others being 
shown honestly and fairly, and with such blooms the south- 
country growers were nowhere. 
Liverpool as a Chrysanthemum-growing district is able to 
contest honestly and fairly with growers from any part.— 
W. BARDNEY, Vorris Green, West Derby. . 
AFTER what we haye seen at Liverpool on the 20th of last 
month in regard to the judging of cut blooms of Chrysanthe- 
mums we do not wonder at Sir Henry Peek asking the question, 
‘‘ Who were the Judges?”” We are also in doubt as to what 
are the points of merit to be considered before awarding a 
prize. Our ideas in judging Roses or Chrysanthemums are— 
first colour, second symmetry of form, third size of petal in 
Telation to the variety, fourth and last size of bloom in rela- 
tion to variety. Summing up these four points we think a 
correct decision may be given. Judging the blooms by the 
above test by a jury and calling four witnesses, we are then 
justified in condemning the awards of the Judges at Liverpool. 
We are quite at a loss to know on what principles the premier 
prize was awarded to the stand that in a few hours afterwards 
was disqualified by the Secretary and Committee. There was 
only one bloom in the whole twenty-four that bore the charac- 
ter of a Chrysanthemum. Whoever saw Hmpress of India 
grow in shape like a Pine Apple, or Queen of England like an 
Trish haycock, or Golden Beverley like a Globe Mangold, and 
Alfred Salter and Jardin des Plantes like the cones of Picea 
nobilis ? 
Mr. Ollerhead’s letter referred to by Sir Henry Peek is a 
correct account as far as the fraudulent stand was concerned, 
but he does not give other exhibitors the credit of showing 
honestly. I was standing close by Mr. Ollerhead while the 
delinquent’s stand was undergoing examination, and heard, as 
he must have done, the other exhibitors offer their stands to 
the Committee and Secretary for examination, which was 
objected to on the grounds that no protest had been lodged 
against them. Why, then, did Mr. Ollerhead not lodge a 
formal protest against other stands if he had a suspicion of 
the integrity of the blooms? I submit that as he did not do 
so he ought in justice to others to state plainly that his sus-. 
picion was limited to the disqualified stand. The letter as 
it stands conyeys an unpleasant impression affecting the whole 
of the exhibitors, 
As to who was the first to make the discovery of the fraudu- 
lent blooms it is difficult to say, but it is certain that many 
exhibitors were equally anxious that any unfair exhibiting 
should be officially denounced. It is certain that a lady who 
takes much interest in the cultivation of the Chrysanthemum 
hinted that there was something wrong early in the day; that, 
however, is a comparatively trivial matter. Of much greater 
importance is it that the public in this case must not infer 
that one black sheep infects the whole flock. 
As was correctly stated in the Journal last week Mr. Roberts 
did not take first honours last year. In 1877 Mr. Tunnington 
was first, in 1876 Mr. Meerse, in 1875 Mr. Elliott, and I think 
Mr. Norrie was first in 1874. 
If Mr. Ollerhead or any other southern Chrysanthemum 
grower has any suspicion about our honesty they have only to 
give us an invitation, and we will meet them in a friendly 
manner next year at any Chrysanthemum show out of London, 
or even in London, if they make their schedules more explicit 
and give us a list of names, so that we may know exactly what 
varieties to put in our stands.—ALLERTON. 
SPECIAL reference having been made to the blooms that E 
exhibited at the above Show, and also of the proceedings I 
took against the first-prize blooms, I think it is only fair that 
I should have a say in the matter. The blooms were not 
staged until twenty minutes past twelve, the whole collectively 
in the different classes for competition numbering three hun- 
dred—viz., seven twenty-fours, two eighteens, six twelves, and 
four sixes, all incurved; to which may be added a stand of 
Japanese, not for competition, by Mr. Tunnington. 
At a glance I could see that large blooms of no matter what 
quality were the aim of all exhibitors, and this I remarked to 
several bystanders, including the Secretary. The latter gentle- 
man said, “ Yes, we go in for size at Liverpool. One year we 
went in for neat compact blooms. I forget now who were 
the Judges, but there was a great deal of dissatisfaction about 
it, sowe always stick to size now.’ I said at the time it was 
hardly fair ; it was like putting overgrown Drumhead Cabbages 
against good useful kinds. Mr. Tunnington had shown me 
twelve of his blooms earlier in the day, and asked me the 
name of one he did not know, adding, “I suppose your blooms 
are double the size of these.” ‘Oh, no,” I replied, ‘my blooms 
are smaller than yours.’ When the first six stands were 
staged and he saw I had told him the truth, he said, “ Well, 
now, how do you think we stand?” and Mr. Peerse, who staged 
next to me, also requested my opinion of his blooms. I glanced 
along the stands, which for the first-prize holder did not re- 
quire much consideration. I told Mr. Tunnington he was first 
by a good few points, but Mr. Peerse I thought would be 
nowhere. He hada grand bloom of Barbara, but the others 
were all flown; some of them were so open they would have 
taken a fair-sized bloom of Mrs. G. Rundle to fill up their 
centres. I know Mr. Peerse must have felt much annoyed at 
my verdict, nevertheless it was my candid opinion, and, L 
added, they remind me of overgrown split Cabbages. Had 
they been full in the centres they would haye been monsters. 
I believe Mr. Tunnington at this time was quite satisfied he 
would be first. The officials were busy clearing everybody out, 
when Mr. Wallis of Keele Hall wished to know which were 
mine. I pointed them out, adding, “They are no use; they go 
in for size here, quality seems entirely out of the question, and 
in that case I shall be nowhere.” He replied, “They are an 
eyen lot, and very neat; I don’t think I ever saw such a pretty 
lot. The others are too coarse.” On leaying the Hall and im 
going down the steps I found | had not put my ticket on the 
stand, which I ran back with, and had another clear view of 
the blooms. It was then that I first noticed the small petals 
around the middle of Mr. Roberts’s blooms, which hada very 
strange appearance. On my return I told Mr. Hinds I did not 
think much of those that were last staged, they seemed as 
though they had made a double growth and had a lot of small 
petals around the middle of them, which I could not under- 
stand. He said, “‘ Well, it is curious the freaks and forms that 
Nature takes sometimes, and it is not always easy to account 
for them.” 
On our return at four o’clock we went to see who had the 
prizes, when to my unutterable astonishment Mr. Roberts was 
first with those ugly blooms. Iat once expressed my opinion in 
the matter, and made the following notes :—“ Class A, first prize 
Mr. F. Roberts. The only good bloom on the stand one of Gen. 
Slade ; the otherslookas though a double growth had taken place, 
which is yery conspicuous in the blooms of Queen of England, 
ae pee 
