January 29, 1898. 



CHRYSANTHEMUMS FOR 1898. 



Surely there is no need for the feeling displayed by Mr. W. H. Lees in his reply 

 to mv criticism on his article on new chrysanthemums. I, and other writers, have 

 perfect right to criticise such and offer our opinion on the same, and if anyone 

 will trouble to refer to my comments on p. 6 they will not find anything that is 

 objectionable, unless it be a presumption on my part to differ in opinion with a 

 member of the Floral Committee of the N.C.S. who has been awarded several big 

 prizes As to the oersonal remarks of Mr. Lees I can only say we are not dis- 

 cussing catalogues or manners, and whether I am a more or less modest individual 

 than Mr. Lees cannot be of much interest to anyone. In reply to Mr. Lees 

 statement that the list was not penned by him for the especial satisfaction of trade 

 growers, I ask him to mention which of the varieties that I have so strongly 

 recommended I have any special interest it. None of them were raised or sent 

 out by my firm, and in the list of novelties I abstained from mentioning any of 

 mine that are to be sent out this season, although certificated by the N.C.S. Mr. 

 Lees says he " only gave those varieties which from my own personal experience 

 and my own personal observation over a lengthy round of shows and other col- 

 lections appeal to me as the most suitable." Just so, and I did likewise. Mr. 

 Lees wishes us to believe that it is from his position as a member of the Floral 

 Committee that he gathers some of his experience. Strange to note, there are 

 many in his selection of new varieties which have qot been noticed by this com- 

 mittee, whilst others that have been certificated this season by the N.C.S. and the 

 R.H.S. are not quoted. This does not say much for the value of certificates. Is 

 Mr. Lees quite sure that he did not consider some trade grower's interest when in 

 his selection of twenty new ones, he placed ten from one grower ? ■ Ten from one 

 grower, not including two— Dr. Liebert and Surpasse Amiral— which are likely to 

 prove, next season, superior to many of those quoted, seems to savour a bit of 



bias. 



Now let us discuss the varieties. Pride of Madford, we are assured on p. 808 



seedling plants. In the second place there is just the possibility of the sport not 

 inheriting equally the form and vigour of its parent, though I am much inclined tc 

 believe that the first named is the real cause in this instance. First sports are 

 most likely to retain all the characteristics of the parent variety except, of course, 

 colour, and deterioration is much more likely to occur in the case of secondary 

 or further removed sports. The question which I am invited to answer in the last 

 paragraph is of no interest to readers in general, but could be answered by the 

 little file of bills which I keep as historical records of new chrysanthemums. & I 

 have never yet purchased any at 25s., and in future mean to be extremely careful in 

 obtaining high-priced novelties. 



Trent Park Gardens. W. II. Lees. 



A F 



Ch 



Aud 



Some of my friends who are members of the N.C.S. will remember being 

 asked to take part in an election of the best fifty chrysanthemums that 

 was organised by the editor of the Moniteur d } Horticulture during the 

 past season. Unfortunately many of the lists I distributed were not 

 returned at all, but a considerable number, however, were despatched by 

 me to Paris in time for the election. 



The results have recently been published, and it is interesting to find 

 that chrysanthemum growers to the number of 1,057 sent in returns. 

 These growers were resident in England, France, America, Belgium, 

 Switzerland, Italy, Portugal, Austria, Germany, Spain, Turkey, 

 Koumania, Greece, Tunis, and Monaco, a fairly representative body one 

 would think. Out of this abundant testimony to the excellence of 

 Madame Carnot is found in that variety obtaining i,oii votes, so that 

 whatever may be the individual opinion of the reader as to the positions 

 occupied by other varieties, there will be little doubt entertained that 



(1897), has, with snch grand kinds as M. Chenon de Lech^, Mrs. J. Lewis, Mutual ouupicu uy ouicr varieties, mere win oe nine aoi 

 Friend, Edith Tabor, and others, "been consistently good," and the same writer this celebrated white Japanese is in her proper place. 



now informs us he cannot recommend it among the best twenty-four instead of one 

 of the nine whites, because it is too incurved. What are we to understand by 

 "consistently good"? Madame Ad. Chatin I did not compare with Western 

 King ; and I, for the sake of argument, may say the latter is not to be compared 

 with Madame Carnot. I still contend, and I know many are of the same opinion, 

 that Madame Ad. Chatin, and many others missing from Mr. Lees' list, are vastly 

 superior to Madame Ad. Moulin. Mons. Hoste and Pride of Exmouth "are of 

 poor colour, and washy and undecided mauve tints are not desirable " we are now 

 told. I maintain that both of these varieties are superior in colour and form to 

 Mrs. W. H Lees and others in the list of fifty. Lady Saunders, I admit, 

 occasionally comes good, and this is proved by the fact that Mr. Lees had it as a 

 back-row flower in 1896, but where was it in 1897 ? Ella Curtis, as grown here, 

 was the admiration of all who saw it, and was a truly handsome flower, Mrs. 

 Maling Grant to have proved a failure must have had very poor treatment. It is 

 one of the easiest varieties to grow I know. Mr. Lees maintains that a stand of 

 twenty-four may contain six or seven each of white and yellow. Quite so ! But 

 in the selection given there are nine whites, not counting Mrs. W. I I. Lees, which 

 is generally shown in this form, dirty white though it be, and but five yellows. I 

 never recommended Mrs. Harman Payne and Ethel Addison ; I admit they are of 

 bad type, although Mr. Lees places the sport from the former, Mrs. W. G. Palmer, 

 among the best fifty, Mr. Lees points to the fact that Lady Saunders was in his 

 stand of sixty at the N.C.S. in 1896, and he is thereby justified in including it 

 among the best fifty. I would like to point out that upon looking up the reports 

 of the principal shows I find it mentioned just once, but those varieties which Mr. 

 Lees decries were in nearly aH the champion prize stands at all the principal 

 sho*s. To wit, the £$0 and gold medal at Edinburgh, won by Mr. Ilaggart. 

 Special mention is made among others of Madame Ad. Chatin. ^25, forty-eight 

 Japanese, same show and exhibition, Mrs. F. A. Be van, Mrs. Maling Grant, and 

 Mac tame Ad. Chatin. We are told these blooms were magnificent. In N.C.S. 

 champion class for forty-eight Japanese, the first prize was won by Mr. Mease, 

 whose variety included Joseph Brooks, Pride of Exmouth, and Lady Hamilton in 

 back row; also showing Julia Scaramanga, Madame G. Henry, Mrs. Blick, and 

 Mons. Hoste. The first prize stand of twelve Japanese at the N.C.S. exhibition 

 with twenty-two competitors, included Madame Gustave Henry and M. Ed. 

 Andre. At the same show, the first prize for twenty-four Japanese with twenty- 

 four competitors, Mons. Ed. Andre in back row, and for the only time I here find 

 Madame Ad. Moulin, but m the middle row. Dundee : In the first thirty-six 

 lapanese, Madame Gustave Henry ; same show, eighteen Japanese, Mrs. F. A. 

 Be van, Madame Gustave Henry ; and in most of the largest shows were these 

 disparaged varieties, frequently shown together with the other varieties that I have 

 mentioned and omitted by Mr. Lees. 



Returning once more to the new varieties, and here Mr. Lees' ruling seems a 

 most peculiar and ambiguous one. Because a variety has been once mentioned 

 by Mr. Lees, is it to be classed among the older varieties ? Or are all u new " until 

 this gentleman quotes them ? This seems to be the case. Because C. E. Jeffock, 

 which was catalogued in 1896, has not been seen by Mr. Lees until now, is it to 

 be classified as a new variety? Again, because Madame Phillippe Rivoire has not 

 been catalogued by two trade-growers, must itistill be considered " new," although 

 several others catalogued it, and hundreds of plants were last season sent to all 

 P a ' ts °f l he kingdom ? This variety was catalogued last season by Mr. Davis, 

 although Mr. Lees informs us it is not this. Whether Topaze Orientale will find 

 a place among the incurved, or whether I am justified in criticising Mr. Lees' 

 selection, time will tell. J* 



Exmouth. 



W. J. Godfrey. 



Wells 



in agreement with that of other people, and it is a pity he has chosen to make a 

 Phonal matter of my remarks in reference to the Yellow Madame Carnot called 

 \V ^ Warren - Personalities are of no interest to readers of the Gardeners' 

 magazine, and my notes were not intended in the least degree as a reflection on 

 tht el,s s re P utati °n, and it requires a lively stretch of imagination to believe 

 mat they were. What I stated was but fair comment on a matter of general 

 interest. This particular variety was exhibited three times before the Floral 

 committee ere a first-class certificate was awarded, and there is no doubt that the 

 prestige of the parent had as much influence with the committee in the granting of 

 nat award as the merits of the blooms shown, which were not so good as many 



oiner vaneties certificated last season, and, in my opinion would not, on their 

 individual merits, have gained the award. 



so fpH P °l nt * w< : re that ove * propagation (itself practically a necessity) may have 

 a J,l t au 7 the vitality of the plants distributed as to account for the very moderate 



r^J-wi r glooms. It is a well-known fact that this cause is sometimes 

 responsible for failure* ™a ;* i:i_u, — .u ^ .u__ „c 



The proportion of French seedlings is overwhelming, as might be 



expected, and of these Calvat's occupy a preponderance that leaves all 



other growers in the shade. It is not my intention to attempt to justify 



the results, but I have thought those English friends who kindly took 



part in the election would like to be made acquainted with the result. 



Votes. 



t ■ • 



• • # 



Madame Carnot (CalvatJ 

 Le Colosse Grenoblois (Calvat) 

 Mrs. C. flarman Payne (Calvat) 

 Madame Ed. Roger (Calvat) ... 

 Viviand Morel (Lacroix) 

 Calvat's Australian Gold (Calvat) 

 Enfant des deux Mondes (Crozy) 

 W. H. Lincoln (Japan) 

 Hairy Wonder (Jones)... 



Wm. Tricker (Japan) 



Madame Calvat (Calvat) 

 Etoile de Lyon (Boucharlat) ... 

 Souvenir de petite ami (Calvat) 

 Colonel W. B. Smith (Spaulding) 

 Madame Lucie Faure (Calvat) 

 Reine d'Angleterre (Calvat I .. 



Waban (Japan)... 



M. Chenon de Leche (Calvat) 

 Louis Boehmer (Japan) 

 Amiral Avellan (Calvat) 

 Edwin Molyneux (Cannell) ... 



L. Isere (Calvat) 



Mrs. Ily. Robinson (America) 

 N. C. S. Jubilee (Calvat) ... 

 Phoebus ( Lacroix ) 

 Florence Davis (N. Davis) ... 

 Madame Marius Ricoud (Calvat) 



■ ■ 



« • 1 



■ • • 



• • • 



• • ■ 



• • • 



• • • 



• 1 



a p 1 



- • . 



• • I 



• t 



■ • • 



• • • 



a • • 



• • • 



• ■ 



a a a 



• I ■ 



t • • 



• • • 



• - • 



• • • 



■ • I 



• * 



• • • 



• • • 



• • • 



• • • 



• • • 



• • ■ 



• • • 



• • ■ 



t • • 



• • • 



• ■ 



• ■ 



t • t 



• ■ 



» • • 



• • • 



a » • 



■ • 



• a 



- ■ • 



a a • 



• • • 



• • • 



• • • 



• ■ a 



a • • 



• a 



• • • 



• a • 



• a 



a • • 



• • • 



ft a 



• a • 



a * 



• ■ • 



a • a 



■ • 



a • a 



* a a 



a a 



a a a 



• • a 



• a 



a * 



• a 



Niveus (N. Smith) 

 Wm. Falconer (Spaulding) 

 E. Forgeot (Forgeot) ... 

 Chas. Davis (N. Davis) 

 Philadelphia (Graham) 

 Deuil de Jules Ferry (Calvat) 



Lilian B. Bird (Japan) 



Duchess of York (Carruthers) 



Louise (Calvat) 



Captain Lucien Chaure (Calvat) 



Le Moucherotte (Calvat) 



Yellow Dragon (Japan) 



Tulian Hillpert (Jones) 



'Madame Ph. Rivoire (Rivoire) 



Ma Perfection (Calvat) 



Henry Jacotot fils (Calvat) ... ... 



Madame Lucien Chaure (de Reydellet) 



Belle des Gardes (Calvat) 



Eda Prass (Dorner) ... 



Robt. Owen (Owen) ... ••• ••• 



Madame Chapuis Parent (Rozain) ... 



The Queen (America)... 



M. Panckoucke (Calvat) 



a a 



• a 



a a 



a • 



a • • 



a • 



a « • 



a a 



a • « 



* a 



a • • 



a a 



a • 



» • 



a • 



a • ■ 



1,011 



997 



994 

 976 



971 



895 

 887 



S76 



809 



808 



767 



762 



721 



706 



701 



689 



682 



661 



660 



643 

 639 



631 



623 



614 

 605 

 603 



593 

 584 



578 



56i 



558 

 557 

 549 

 539 



532 

 524 



503 

 487 



484 

 481 



463 

 442 



43i 

 428 



426 



. • • • - • 4^ ^ 



419 



. . . ♦ • . 4 ~ / 



411 



408 



C. Harman Payne. 



a a a 



a ■ • 



• • • 



a • • 



• • * 



a • « 



• • • 



a a 



at* 



• • • 



a a 



• a 



a • 



Lemon Pippin Apple.-Not with much prospect of success this old apple 

 was the other day entered at the Drill Hall in the flavour competition ; it ,s a good 

 keeper, but having rather hard flesh, with a peculiar quince flavour. Such an 

 apple could hardly win in such a competition where so many other better varieties 

 were staged. But the term " lemon seems to be a comparatively modern one, 

 as more than sixty years ago it was mentioned as having been one hundred years 

 in commerce, and always grown as Quince Apple though latterly called Lemon 

 Pippin in Kent. The true Lemon Pippin of that day was a fruit ripening in 

 October and November, bright yellow in colour, round in shape, and rather 

 flattened at the ends, flesh crisp and juicy. That description differs materially 

 from what is applicable to the variety now grown as Lemon Pippin However 

 we have plenty of better apples than are either of these named. Of a list of one 

 hundred and thirty varieties in 1834, not more than twenty-five are now commonly- 

 grown. — A. D, 



