November 2, 1S73. ] 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



3RS 



to nie to look at the whole matter as an exhibitor, but that 

 was Dot the intention of " J. H." It was not certainly my 

 notion in giving in my list. The wish was to give a liet of the 

 b3st Roses, and this accounts, I think, for the position assigned 

 to Gloire de Dijon. It is true, as an exhibition Rose it is 

 rarely up to the mark, but as a garden Rose in all Boils, situ- 

 ations, climates, what can touch it ? If I had to grow but one 

 Rose old Gloire would be my choice. For the same reason 

 I imagine Comtesse de Chabrillant occnpies a low position. 

 Exhibitors have not included her because she is small ; but 

 barring that it is tho perfection of a Rose, and I would give 

 her a foremost place on that account alone. For the same 

 eiuse— usefulness iu a garden, I imagine Souvenir da la Mal- 

 maison is placed where it is. 



Another point that " Wtld Savage " entirely overlooks is the 

 effect of situation and climate. Some Roses which he names 

 and the merits of which ho thinks have been overlooked are 

 doubtless gems, but it is not given to everybody to be in a 

 charming spot where Teas grow like weeds, and hence Marie 

 Van Houtte, Belle Lyonnaise, and Catherine Mermet will 

 not do with everybody as they will with him. And the same 

 remarks apply to H.P.'s also. Duke of Wellington is no 

 doubt a grand Rose, bat then it will not grow in many places, 

 and it is not everybody who can afford to grow and throw 

 away every year. Nor is Madame Charles Wood, over whoss 

 neglected charms " Wyld Savage " mourns, a Rose the vigour 

 of which we can rely upon. I do not quite understand what he 

 means about Celine Foreatier, whether surprised at the position 

 she occupies or regret that she does not take a higher one ; 

 as an exhibition Rose she i3 difficult to catch, but as a garden 

 Rose how lovely it is ! 



But then the list is altogether a failure because Hercules 

 has not given iu his names ! One might imagine (only that 

 no "she" could write thus) that it was Omphale mourning 

 over her neglected lord ; but he is rather like the carter in the 

 old fable, whose cart was stuck in the mud, and who stood 

 wringing his hands and calling out Hercules ! Hercules ! to 

 deliver him. I rather imagine, from what I know of the mus- 

 cular hero, that it was not because he foresaw a failure that 

 he did not giie in his list, hut because he has a great objection 

 to wielding the pen. There is no one for whom I entertain a 

 greater regard than the said Hercules. I believe him to bo a 

 very champion, but then I know also all his growing has exhi- 

 biting in view. He resides in a climate where there is but 

 little to contend with in the way of weather, and hence his list 

 might have disadvantages to many. 



But the next charge is the strangest of all — that' the lists 

 are sent iu by nobodies, that we are no better than the clod- 

 hoppers ia a village alehouse, &c. Now in the lists of amateurs 

 I see such names amongst amateurs as Christy, Peach, Camm ! 

 Mayo, Baaehey, Cheales, Laxton, and Jowitt, men who are 

 most of them exhibitors, and have, if I mistake not, knocked 

 " Wyld Savage'' out of time more than once ; and find that 

 amongst professional growers C*nt, Cranston, Curtis, G. Paul, 

 Prince, and Turner have given iu their Ikta. I hold my 

 breath in astonishment at the " Wyld " rush of the Savage, 

 and wonder what he wants. 



And then as to the blunders about names of raisers. " J. H." 

 deserves our lest thanks for endeavouring to supply them, 

 and it was not to be expected that it would not be imperfect. 

 As to Marie Cuintet (which most people find too delicate to be 

 a gem of the first water), Mr. Bennett certainly was not its 

 raiser ; but had it not been for him I think it would have been 

 consigned to the " tomb of all the Capulets." It had been 

 passed by until he brought it forward. If " J. H." has any 

 difficulty about raisers' names I fancy Mr. Cant could help 

 him, as I remember years ago seeiDg with him a note-book in 

 which each year's new Boses were inserted with the names of 

 the raisers, and he may have it yet. 



I hope " J. H." will not think " Wyld Savage " a representa- 

 tive man on this occasion. I hope he only represents himself, 

 but that most of us thank him heartily for his work.— D., Deal. 



"Wyld Savage" certainly writes as though he was civilised, 

 to an extent perhaps influenced, or probably limited, by the 

 nature of the soil he lives on. To think that he should debase 

 the character of my charming Gloire de Dijon, which gives me 

 innumerable perfect blooms twice in the year, while others 

 will call this Eose "Glory Die-John" and " Glorie-dee-die- 

 John." 



I have seen the results of the Rose election, and believe that 

 each list is the conscientious opinion of your correspondents. 



| Mr. Hinton need not be alarmed at differences of opinion. 

 I certainly dislike that coarse Paul Neron, and should have 

 excluded him as quite unfit even for the company of Gloire de 

 Dijon. I can also imagine that some of your voters have not 

 had sufficient experience of Beauty of Waltham, Duo de 

 RohaD, and Belle Lyonnaise, to recommend them in their list; 

 or can it be that these have been tried, and are not good with 

 them? 



It is not every season that I buy new Boses, and then only 

 to fill up ; and although I watch your weekly issue with keen 

 interest for all the news, and even anticipate your election by 

 my own private election list for comparison sake, I too can 

 differ in some respects with the result, principally through old 

 favourites giving place to new varieties ; but then, is it possible 

 to obtain fifty people growing Boses in different soils, atmo- 

 spheres, and circumstances, of one opinion respecting some 

 Roses, and particularly new introductions? 



Frequent disappointments have cooled my ardour, and now 

 I never buy new Roses until they have gained honours in the 

 priza list. — Maeie Van Houtte. 



" Consider yourself, sir, well sat upon." And so I do, and 

 know also that I have yet further condemnation to expect 

 from private letters I have received ; but yet in self-defence I 

 must say one word more. I had not the slightest idea when 

 asked to send in a list of Roses that such Roses were not to 

 be selected as exhibition sorts. If I had known that the best 

 Roses for general purposes were meant I should have had 

 nothing to do with the election. I grow Roses for exhibition, 

 and not for decorating my garden, or for ladies and children 

 to run about among them with a pair of scissors cutting here 

 and snipping there, and detesting the very idea of disbudding. 



As a garden Rose the " Gloire " is no doubt a grand Rose in 

 its way, but infinitely surpassed even in this light by Madame 

 Trifle, Belle Lyonnaise, and Madame Berard. Whatever con- 

 demnation I may meet with from the rosarians who havo 

 written or may yet write to you on tho subject of the Gloire 

 as an exhibition flower I care not so long as I have' such an 

 authority on my side as Mr. Benjamin R. Cant. I think it 

 will be allowed by all that no other nurseryman shows the Tea 

 Roso in such perfect form and colour as the great Colchester 

 rosarian, and yet he does not place the Gloire in the first fifty. 

 Mr. Corp of Oxford, and Mr. Fraser of Lea Bridge, also exclude 

 it, so that I am by no means alone. I am much interested in 

 the lists, and have my mind now set at rest as to what nursery- 

 men excluded Charles Lefebvre from the first twenty. I see 

 they are Messrs. Ewing & Co. of Norfolk, who of course place 

 Gloire de Dijon in that exalted position. 



The table published by Mr. Hinton in last week's issue is a 

 most interesting one, and although he may point to its bear- 

 ing out hi3 views I may also do the same. Duke of Wel- 

 lington in this list is 27 ; in the former list he was placed 

 39th. However, after all, as Mr. Paul so well ehows, it is 

 impossible to arrive at any real judgment of the qualities of 

 the Rose, for what will flourish in one soil will scarcely live 

 in another. — Wyld Savage. 



WEYBKIDGE. 



Last year I gave a few hurried notes of a visit i paid to 

 Weybridge Heath on a very wet day, and of the interest which 

 there is to the horticulturist in the gardens of Dr. Hanry 

 Bennett and Mr. G. F. Wilson. This year, under more favour- 

 able circumstances, I was enabled to repeat my visit and to 

 add to it another — that of the famed garden of Mr. Mcintosh 

 of Duneevan, and perhaps a few additional notes on them may 

 not be unacceptable to the readers of our Journal. 



No three places could give, I think, a better idea of the hor- 

 ticultural zeal of our nation and of its varied character than 

 these I have mentioned. They are all small — merely the gar- 

 dens attached to villa residences, and all essentially different. 

 In the garden of Dr. Bennett we have the refined taste and 

 love for elegancies which mark the travelled and accomplished 

 physician (not forgetting the placens uxor), where all insid the 

 Louse and in the garden tell of how much stress is laid on that 

 which is pleasing to the eye and in accordance with the Btrict 

 principles of taste. In that of Mr. G. F. Wilson we have that 

 of the enthusiast, whose object is to gather together the 

 choicest and best of the plants he loves so well, and to be 

 more interested in their successful culture than in the effect 

 produced as a matter of taste ; while in that of Mr. Mcintosh 

 we have the carrying-out in its fulness of the culture of one or 



