January 17, 1884. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
45 
close resemblance, is a distinct and beautiful species, yielding under 
good culture several crops of flowers of the purest white. When well 
grown the scapes bear as many as ten flowers each. This plant was 
introduced in 1851 by M. Linden, but disappeared shortly afterwards to 
be replaced by a species of Calliphruria—C. subedentata, which was 
introduced as the lost Eucharis, and for a long time was cultivated as 
such. As a garden plant it is much inferior to the Eucharis, and, more¬ 
over, is rather difficult to flower. Mr. Bull in 1879, and Mr. Shuttleworth 
large growers the Auricula and Carnation shows would lose much of 
their attractiveness. But what, I take it, “ X.” complains of is that large 
growers compete in classes where they really ought not to be. What 
does Mr. Douglas say in reply ? “ In order to keep the great grorcers " 
(the italics are mine) “ from competing against the smaller ones," 
exhibitors in classes A and B cannot compete in C and D.” But has this 
been found to be the case in practice, in the Auricula Society at all 
events ? I have before me your issue of May 3rd last, in which your 
FIG. 8—eucharis sahdfriaka. 
more recently, succeeded in obtaining bulbs of the true E. Candida, which 
is now becoming as popular as its merits deserve. —W. K. 
[For the woodcut (fig. 8) representing a plant of Eucharis Sanderiana 
in excellent condition we are indebted to Mr. W. Bull, King’s Road, 
Chelsea.] 
SPECIAL SOCIETIES. 
I FULLY agree with the principles enunciated by Mr. J. Douglas on 
page 14 as to the undesirability of creating a monopoly for inferior 
productions. I concur with him that were it not for the support of the 
esteemed contributor “ D., Deal" writes on the Auricula Show as 
follows :—“ In the class for four and pairs there were eight exhibitors,, 
although I cannot but think unfair use was made by some exhibitors of 
the classes. I have said that in the classes of four and two plants 
exhibitors showed who I do not think in all fairness ought to be there. 
When one states that ‘ he ’ has an over-stock of 1000 plants that he want& 
to dispose of, it cannot but be that he must swamp the young exhibitor 
who, with his forty or fifty plants, is desirous of gaming a prize. When 
classes are made for the special purpose of allowing small growers to 
compete, I hardly think it is desirable for the large growers to enter. 
These extracts speak for themselves, and really bear out the complaint. 
