April 9, 1886. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
293 
marked to hold out hopes of surpassing favoured visitors. Perhaps at the 
last summer show the local vegetables were somewhat in advance of 
previous years, in which the exceptionally fine season may have played a 
part. Yet even then at their best, what comparison did they bear to the 
first-prize collection staged by Mr. Lambert of Shrewsbury? I think it 
will be admitted not a very favourable one. I do not object to being 
surpassed in two or three classes, as suggested by “ Northerner,” for pro¬ 
bably I have been defeated as many times as most gardeners during the 
few years I have been an exhibitor. What I do object to is having 
imposed upon us an impossible task. Give us something like a prospect 
of competing on equal terms, then I have no objection to being honestly 
defeated. 
Reference is made to the Shrewsbury schedule, but this is not perfect; 
indeed, generally speaking, it cannot bear comparison with Liverpool. 
Are there no restrictions at Shrewsbury ? But I think framers of schedules 
should pause and consider what constitutes “ restriction.” It must not be 
thought that the “ broader and more liberal principles ” suggested by 
“ Northerner ” are the wisest or surest means of attaining the desired 
end. Surrounding circumstances must be considered, all matters well 
weighed in the balance, and not rush headlong to the conclusion that, 
because it looks well on paper, we must throw every class open irrespective 
of local circumstances. In a word, my contention is that to impose upon 
Liverpool gardeners and others in like circumstances the task of com¬ 
peting with all comers in collections of vegetables and dessert Apples and 
Pears is “ restriction ” in its most severe form. Your correspondent pro¬ 
bably attended the two last Chrysanthemum shows of the Association ; 
if so, what comparison did he draw between the hardy fruit exhibited from 
Kent and that staged by local exhibitors ? Certainly the difference was 
very conspicuous to my mind and that of many others. 
“Northerner” asks if I think horticulture in the neighbourhood of 
Liverpool is advanced by provision being made only for nurserymen and 
professional gardeners. My reply is that I think it is to a very appreciable 
extent; but whether it might be further advanced by special provision 
being made for cottagers and amateurs I am not quite prepared to say. 
There are, however, several Window Gardening Societies in and around 
Liverpool which are doing useful work.—A. R. Cox. 
CULTURE OF CELOSIAS. 
Now is a good time to sow seeds of C. pyramidalis, aurea 
and rubra, when the plants are required to bloom in the autumn. 
They are not grown in so many gardens as they deserve to be, 
and this perhaps may be attributed to the many worthless 
varieties that are sent out under the above names. We are 
fortunate in having a good strain of Celosia pyramidalis, and 
we make it rule to save seed from none but the best varieties, 
and by so doing we have seldom a worthless plant in our col¬ 
lection. We sow the seeds in pots about the beginning of 
April, and plunge them in a bottom heat of 80° until they have 
germinated, after which they are removed to a shelf near the 
glass in the propagating house, where they remain till they are 
ready to be pricked off into pots or pans. We use a compost of 
equal parts of loam, leaf mould, and peat, with a good sprinkling 
of river sand added, and the pots or pans are again plunged in 
bottom heat for a few days until the roots have taken to the 
soil. We then remove the plants to the shelf near the glass, 
keeping them well water ed and syringed until they are placed 
in 4-inch pots. The compost employed then is equal parts of 
loam, leaf mould, peat, and cowdung, with a dash of rough 
river sand. They must not be allowed to become root-bound at 
this stage or they will flower prematurely. If practicable, we 
keep the pots half plunged, and when this cannot be done we 
stand them on a moist bottom, which saves watering and also 
benefits the plants. When dwarf specimens are required we 
pinch the points out of the plants when they have grown 3 or 
4 inches high, but we seldom practise this system. We allow the 
plants to grow vigorously, and can always manage to keep a 
good succession of bloom by employing pots of various sizes for 
flowering the plants in. The sizes range from 6 to 10 inches, 
but the latter should only be used when large specimens are 
required. An 8-inch pot we find most serviceable for ordinary 
plants. 
The Celosia grows best in a light house with a warm moist 
atmosphere, as few plants are more subject to the attacks of red 
spider, and they must be carefully watered at all times, never 
allowing the soil to become dry. Excessive watering must be 
equally guarded against to prevent souring the soil, as few 
plants will show signs of ill health sooner than these when over¬ 
watered. When the pots are full of roots the plants are greatly 
benefited by weak liquid manure applied at every alternate 
watering. 
They should always be supplied with clear water before apply¬ 
ing the liquid manure, as the roots ai’e easily injured by strong 
supplies, and the water must always be about the same temperature 
as the house in which the plants are growing. After they begin 
developing their feathery infloresence they can be gradually 
hardened off before being placed in the conservatory, where they 
will continue for a long time in bloom. Their culture is simple, 
and when well grown they have few equals either for their flowers 
or as decora’ive plan’s.— A. Smith. 
THE WEATHER OF 1884. 
Mr. Edward Mawley’s excellent annual, giving the meteorology of 
the year as observed in the neighbourhood of London, is now issued 
(Edward Stanford, 55, Charing Cross), and, as usual, it contains a most 
careful review of the weather during the past season. The special 
characters of each month are given in tabular form, such as the baro¬ 
metric height, shade temperature, humidity, wind, rain, duration of sun¬ 
shine, and variation of the temperature as compared with the Greenwich 
average of twenty years. Some general remarks also accompany each 
month, and a resume for each of the four seasons is given, together with a 
comparison with the preceding year. A table is also given showing the 
meteorology of the year at a glance. 
In the course of his concluding remarks Mr. E. Mawley thus refers to 
the weather in its relation to agriculture and horticulture : — 
For the agriculturist the year 1884 cannot, I think, everything con¬ 
sidered, be regarded as having been by any means a remunerative one, 
although no doubt a decided improvement on many recent years. Yet it 
is not difficult to see in the weather of the past twelve months several 
features of an encouraging kind. For instance, in all the work of preparing 
and cleaning the land it proved the best known for some years past. The 
paucity of rain throughout its course must also have greatly tended towards 
an improved condition of the soil, which had become impoverished by a 
long series of wet years. On the other hand, this continued dry weather, 
although beneficial to the land itself, proved the reverse to all the farm 
crops growing upon it except the Wheat, which in the metropolitan counties 
at least appears to have been rather above average in yield, and of excellent 
quality. This important cereal is, however, especially when planted under 
such favourable conditions as was the case with the last crop, well known 
to resist drought better than any of the others, and indeed in most instances 
to be greatly benefited by prolonged dry weather. Barley, Oats, Peas, and 
Beans, although fairly good in quality, were as a rule more or less under 
average. In the early part of the year, owing to the very open winter, all 
kinds of fodder were unusually abundant. The hay crop, through the dry 
spring, was necessarily very light, but in most cases gathered in excellent 
order. Roots generally had very unfavourable conditions owing to insuffi¬ 
cient moisture at sowing time, and from this cause, and the absence of good 
rains afterwards, were as a rule small and scanty. Potatoes, although poor 
in quality, again proved a heavy crop, and were even freer from disease 
than in 1883. In the autumn, Wheat planting, except on the dry soils, 
was once more carried on very satisfactorily, and at the close of the year 
the young Wheats were looking as well as could be desired. 
In the garden the horticulturist ‘had many adverse circumstances to 
contend with, in front of which must be placed the want for weeks together 
of any rains sufficient to bring about more than a surface wetting of the 
ground, and that too during some of the hottest months of the year. Next 
in order should be placed those bitter winds and frosts of April, which in 
one or two nights entirely destroyed the prospect of a most abundant crop 
of our so-called hardy fruits. Aud scarcely had the fruit trees begun to re¬ 
cover somewhat from this disaster than they, together with Roses and many 
other plants, were subjected to an exceptionally severe attack of green fly, 
which crippled much of their young foliage. In the flower gardens the dry 
weather was much felt throughout the year, but during the late autumn 
they were, owing to the open character of that season, looking particularly 
gay for the time of year. Throughout the winter and early spring vegetables 
were unusually abundant, but their growth after this was greatly retarded 
by the dry condition of the ground. Among kitchen garden crops those 
noticed as being least able to withstand a prolonged drought were Peas, 
Lettuces, and Parsley. At the close of the year the wood of fruit and other 
trees, as well as that of hardwooded plants, had become most satisfactorily 
ripened. The yield of fruit may be stated as follows :—Strawberries, 
Apricots, Peaches, Nectarines, and bush fruits about an average crop, while 
such fruits as Plums, Cherries, Apples, Pears, and Nuts were all below 
average, and in many cases their yield was very poor indeed. 
During the early months of 1884 the number of “ survivals ” from the 
previous year amongst wild flowers was singularly large. Spring flowers 
also abounded, and made their appearance in most cases very much earlier 
than usual. The cold weather of the previous month, however, caused the 
dates in May to be only about average. Throughout a great part of the 
summer the hot dry weather forced most of tne wild plants into blossom 
before their accustomed time, but from the same cause their duration of 
flowering was comparatively very limited. Consequently, when the autumn 
came the banks, woods, and fields were looking particularly bare of blossom. 
In fact, up to the close of the year, although the weather continued in general 
very open and mild, yet but few flowers of any kind were to be had, and, 
strange to say, none at all of those early spring varieties which in mild 
winters almost invariably appear in December. During the early summer 
the foliage of timber trees was noticed as being singularly luxuriant, and 
in October the autumnal tints were, if anything, even finer than in the 
previous year. 
Taking the year 1884 as a whole, it was by no means a favourable one 
for insecAife. The fact seems to have been that the larvse and pupae of 
many insects lay so much at the mercy of the birds and their other 
enemies during the very mild winter of 1883-4 as to make it almost an im¬ 
possibility for any unusually large numbers, at any rate of grubs or cater¬ 
pillars, to make their appearance during the following seasons. In June and 
July there was a perfect plague of green fly, which did considerable damage 
to fruit trees, Roses, &c. Ants, as might have been expected in so dry a 
sunnmer, everywhere abounded. In the north of London the larvae of the 
daddy longlegs (Tipula oleracea) are reported as having done much damage 
on lawns and pasture lands. O wing to the long continuance of dry weather, 
this proved but a poor year for bees and other Hymenoptera. Butterflies 
