THE ORIGIN OF THE FLORIST'S DAHLIA, 



7 



foundations that have within recent years obtained favour with 

 florists. In the golden days of the flower the single varieties 

 were inadmissible, and the Cactus group was unheard of, 

 though it cannot be said to have been non-existent, because the 

 beautiful Juarczii was a genuine introduction from Mexico in 

 the year 1872, and a suggestion of its possibility — one might 

 almost say a forecast of its coming — was seen in a variety known 

 as Brown's Glowworm, that was in high favour in the year 

 1836. 



The species of Dahlia number at least a dozen, if we reckon 

 by names. It is a question if we really know of more than two. 

 Dahlia imperialis is undoubtedly distinct from D. variabilis, and 

 may be dismissed as, for the present at least, having no direct 

 or immediate relation to the florist's flower. D. frustranea is 

 the barren-rayed, and D. super flua the fertile-rayed; they rank 

 as species and the names are Linnaaan. But you will find no 

 essential or specific distinctions that will suffice to separate 

 them. Coccinea, crocata, crocea, lutea and aurantia are names 

 founded on colour alone, and it would only be waste of time to 

 discuss their claims to recognition. D. Barkeries is simply a 

 narrow-rayed form of the single Dahlia of gardens. D. Cervantesi 

 is a neat scarlet-rayed single of no special character. D. excelsa 

 makes a tall stem, and D. scapigera has flower-stems of great 

 length. D. glabrata compels one to pause in this kind of gene- 

 ralising, but a careful diagnosis will make it nothing more nor 

 less than a miniature form of our familiar plant. If glabrata is 

 a distinct species, then we must assign specific rank to Bantam 

 fowls and Shetland ponies ; and all our small editions of favourite 

 plants, that we have ourselves secured by breeding down and 

 successively selecting, will properly clamour to rank as new 

 creations. There is not one essential character in any of these 

 that can separate it from Dahlia variabilis, a plant so appro- 

 priately named that it compels us to acknowledge that common 

 sense obtrudes occasionally even in botanical nomenclature. 



Composite flowers differ from other flowers only in the close 

 association of many florets in one head on a common receptacle, 

 surrounded by an involucre of whorled bracts. The Dahlia 

 belongs to the first sub-order, Tubtdiflorce, the fertile florets of 

 which are tubular, and its immediate alliance is with Aster, 

 Bellis, Inula, and Telekia. It is a matter of importance to ob- 



