April 3, 1884. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER 
the morning, and when the Conference was opened the conservatory was 
crowded. Professor Foster took the chair at 1 P.M., and, after a few 
introductory remarks, called upon Mr. Burbidge to deliver the lecture, 
which had been previously announced, and of which the text will be found 
on page 2G0. It was read in a clear and pleasing manner, and was listened 
to very attentively by the large audience, who cheered the lecturer heartily 
at its conclusion. 
At the conclusion of Mr. Burbidge’s lecture the Chairman made a few 
complimentary remarks as to the completeness and excellence of the dis¬ 
course, and then called upon Mr. Shirley Hibberd, who gave the following 
observations :— 
Mr. Baker’s classification of Narcissi comprises three groups, ordered as 
to the relative length of the crown, and twenty species, a few of which are 
certainly in the nature of accommodations, while others have but a frail 
tenure. As a system of classification it is undoubtedly the best we have, 
and the only one that is now worth serious consideration ; but its weak 
points are strong for the purpose of instruction, and the hypothetical 
hj'bridiser would make ruin even out of many of the species. This hypo¬ 
thetical hyhridiser we are bound to keep in view, for he is the practical critic 
when we enter upon the consideration of the origin of species, and is likely 
to tell us more about it than we ever dreamt of in our philosophical philo¬ 
sophy. Mr. Darwin recognised the aims of the florists as tending to the 
solution of biological problems; but many of his disciples are simply shocked 
at his largeness of view, and put their own personal vanity in the place of 
facts that have been established by workers in the garden. Within a few 
years we have witnessed the impress of the florist’s hand in the world of 
Daffodils ; and Mr. Backhouse, Mr. Leeds, Mr. Nelson, and other hybridisers, 
animated by the high floral inspiration that creates in it desires, have given 
us new races, new varieties, new forms, new colours in the newer population 
of the world of Daffodils. Their success most certainly marks their recog¬ 
nition of specific distinctions. For the purposes of the hybridist the deter¬ 
mination of minute distinctions is waste of time, and the marriage of 
consanguinities as great a violation of biological as of conventional pro¬ 
priety. He requires distinctive types—marriageable certainly, but differing 
as widely as possible in complexion and feature. He will gain but little, 
and be very slow in gaining that little, if he restricts himself to crosses of 
closely related species. Thus, for practical purposes we are brought face to 
face with the question, “ How many distinct types of Narciss are there 
amongst the twenty-one reputed species ?” Opinions will differ, but I am 
here to say that after much thought upon the subject I can find no more 
than five. I will describe them very briefly. The Basket Daffodils are 
represented by Narcissus Corbularia or Bulbocodium; the Trumpet Daffodils 
are represented by Narcissus Pseudo-Narcissus in its many varieties; the 
Chalice Daffodils are represented by Narcissus incompai'abilis, and perhaps 
by Narcissus odorus ; the Cup Daffodils are represented by Narcissus junci- 
folius, Tazetta, and Jonquilla; the Cymbal Daffodils are represented by 
Narcissus poeticus, biflorus, serotinus, and a few more. It is a pretty 
question whether we shall designate the corona of N. odorus a chalice or a 
cup, and that pretty question carries us into the heart of the great subject 
of specific distinctions. 
If I could dare to say that I feel inspired, then I would dare to say that 
there are no distinctions discoverable by the scientific mind in all the realm 
of Daffodils from the trumpets to the cymbals, from the baskets to the cups 
and saucers. We shall be true poets when we find them, because they exist 
solely in the imagination of the fanciful botanist. From end to end, no 
matter where you begin or where you end, the several kinds of Daffodils 
constitute a procession of the most delicate gradations. The species and 
varieties melt into each other in a way to defy scientific classification of 
missing links. I am not prepared to cite examples, but of connecting links 
there are any number, for they may all be regarded as such, and we may 
quote Pope’s lines on the difficulty of dividing and separating, by saying— 
“ Whatever link you strike, 
Tenth or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike.” 
If we attempt to string them in the way of beads on one string we shall be 
perplexed at the separation of the largest from the smallest, for the gigantic 
Emperor and maximus, the largest of all the Daffodils, are next-of-kin to 
minor and minimus, the smallest of all Daffodils, or nearly so. For the 
illustration of this argument I will invite the students of the Narciss to 
consider how weak are such species as calathinus, triandrus, poculiformis, 
Macleaii, dubius, gracilis, intermedius, pachybolbus, biflorus, and some half 
dozen others. The difficulty of grouping, like that of species-making, is 
enormous. Let those who are disposed to undervalue the workers in this 
line of business try their ’prentice hands, and thereby learn to be modest. 
In the year 187G I proposed a classification founded on the number of 
flowers in a scape, and the recognised species easily fell into three groups 
for this purpose. They were Uniflos, or One-flowered ; Pauciflores, or Few- 
flowered ; and Multiflores, or Many-flowered. This did very well until 
Nature cruelly produced a two-flowered trumpet Daffodil, ar.d that reduced 
my classification to the level of a conundrum for which there is no answer. 
Thus, in one way and another, we return to our five types, which I believe 
will be the five species of the future, for species-making is scarcely a growing 
passion. We tend rather to consolidate than divide in our analyses of or¬ 
ganic relationships ; and to reduce the species of Narcissus from twenty-one 
to half a dozen or less will be a somewhat easy task for one familiar with the 
types and also with the methods and achievements by the hybridists. As 
for these last, they are bound to look for the most distinctive forms, the 
most loudly pronounced characters, in order to obtain new forms and new 
characters, and with them the vigour of constitution that fits a vaiiety for 
an abiding glace in the garden. If the hybridists can find more than five or 
six strikingly ti pical Daffodils it will appear that our studies of these 
flowers bav,; thus far been too superficial to be of any use whatever. 
Mr. H. J. Ehves, after remarking that he could not agree with Mr. Hib- 
berd’s method of classification, as most of the species as now defined are 
sufficiently distinct for all practical purposes, he would, however, restrict 
what should be considered as true species to those which had been found in 
a wild state. Referring to the nomenclature adopted, he thought it was very 
desirable that the naming of varieties and hybrids should be simplified as 
much as possible, and considered that it is exceedingly undesirable to bestow 
Latin names upon forms of garden origin. He advocated employing simple 
popular names, or the names of people, in preference to the cumbersome 
designations which some Daffodils have received, and which have tended n 
a considerable degree to bring the plants into discredit. Mr. Barr’s system 
of naming was specially mentioned as an example of the point in question. 
Remarking upon the distribution of Narcissi, Mr. Elwes thought the lecturer 
had not attached sufficient importance to that, for upon it depended a point 
of practical importance. Most of the Narcissi inhabited the south and south¬ 
western parts of Europe, and also in England, where the rainfall and the 
general humidity were greater. It was also found that the roots of the 
Narcissi, instead of dying each season like those of Tulips and most bulbous 
plants, remain fresh and more or less active throughout the year, therefore 
evidently needing a rather moist soil, and not being likely to be benefited by ex¬ 
posure to excessive summer heat or a very dry soil to insure that ripening 
which so many bulbs require. Commenting upon the variability of such 
plants under cultivation he considered that the botanist and gardener are 
mutually dependent upon each other, and only by a careful comparison of 
their observations could the limit of species be satisfactorily determined. 
He concluded by proposing that a resolution be passed to the effect that the 
method of naming garden varieties of Narcissi be simplified, as far as possible 
employing popular names in preference to those derived from the Latin or Greek. 
In response to an invitation from Mr. Elwes and the Chairman, Mr. E. H. 
Krelage cf Haarlem stated that in his opinion the practice adopted by the 
old Dutch florists for many years of giving common names to varieties of 
plants that were produced under cultivation was one that might be advan¬ 
tageously imitated by raisers of Narcissi. At the same time it is desirable to 
exercise some discrimination in bestowing names upon the very numerous 
forms obtained from seed, and which had caused many to denounce them as 
too much alike. It is, however, a matter of fact that the horticulturist who 
is paying special attention to any particular genus or class of plants becomes- 
capable of detecting differences which a less-crained person would not notice. 
He thought also with Mr. Elwes that Holland is naturally better adapted for 
the cultivation of Narcissi than England; and he pointed out that though 
English growers had effected such great advances in the Magnicoronatae 
and Mediocoronatse groups, yet the Tazetta forms had received much more 
attention on the continent, and had been there grown for a number of years 
in very large numbers and of many varieties. 
Mr. J. G. Baker of Kew was next called, and commenced his remarks by 
highly complimenting Mr. Burbidge upon the services he had rendered in 
connection with the Narcissus both as an artist and a writer, and observed 
how very important is the assistance of a skilled draughtsman in fixing the 
characters of the delicate gradations of many Narcissi, without which the 
work of the descriptive botanist is almost useless, as words cannot convey an 
accurate idea of some of the finer characters. He also considered that a 
public acknowledgment was due to Mr. Barr, who has done more than any 
other cultivator to improve the Narcissi and distribute them accurately named ; 
and though he had employed the long descriptive Latin names objected to, he 
had simply followed the example of numbers of excellent writers and botan¬ 
ists of previous days. Still he wished to support Mr. Elwes’ proposition with, 
regard to simplifying the nomenclature of garden varieties. Mr. Hibberd’s 
idea as to grouping was right in the main, but what he termed species Mr. 
Baker would regard as sub-genera, for the species that had been found in a 
wild state are readily distinguishable. In grouping, the terms genus, sub¬ 
genus, species, sub-speci"s, and varieties are employed, the last-named being 
restricted to those found in a state of nature, and for these only he would 
employ true botanical names ; for the two other divisions, garden varieties 
and hybrids, popular names are much preferred. 
Mr. Barr said that his chief object had been to have his collection as 
accurately named as possible, and to this end he had consulted all the best 
authorities ; but when these failed him he had relied upon his own judgment. 
He had at one time adopted such vulgar names as Codlins and Cream for 
some Daffodils, but had then been accused of deserting classical nomenclature ; 
now he was in similar difficulty in the other direction. At the same time it 
should be remembered that he had employed the common names Leeds;, 
Burbidgei, Nelsoni, and Barri for groups of distinct hybrids, with which at 
least no fault could be found. 
The Chairman then put to the Meeting the resolution proposed by Mr. 
Elwes and seconded by Mr. Baker, to this effect, “That, in the opinion of this- 
Conferenceit is desirable a more simple method of naming garden forms and 
hybrid Narcissi be adopted, and that popular or common names be employed 
for them in preference to botanical names.” This was carried unanimously, 
but the Chairman expressed an opinion that it would be advantageous to 
appoint a committee of specialists to consider the whole question ; and this 
was ultimately decided upon, the Committee to meet on the following 
day (Welnesdav). . > 
Mr. W. Brockbank of Manchester called attention to the double N .rcissi 
which he thought had been somewhat neglected, . for many are very 
beautiful and worthy of extensive cultivation. Refen'ing to the structure of 
the double forms, he said it is curious that some of the double forms of 
N. Pseudo-Narcissus retain their stamens and pistil, producing seed freely, but 
he was not sure if the same character was observable, in other double 
varieties, such as the N. incomparabilis group. Some discussion followed 
this, several stating that the double forms frequently bore seed which 
produced plants with single hut never with double flowers, and Mr. Baker 
explained that in some cases the duplication was due to increase of perianth 
divisions, at others to the cutting up of the crown, to the metamorphosis of 
stamens or pistils, or of both : and thus in some cases the stamens might be- 
present only, and in others the pistil only, the latter if fertilised by polieR 
from other flowers being of course capable of producing seed. 
Mr. G. F. Wilson thought it was desirable that more attention should be 
given to the N. Tazetta varieties for cultivation out of doors. It is a common 
opinion that these are really greenhouse plants and much more tender than 
the other groups, but this he had proved was quite a mistake, for he had 
them growing freely in his garden at Weybridge. 
There was some further discussion concerning the culture of particular 
species, in which Mr. Frank Miles, Mr. Short, and the Rev. Engelheart 
engaged, and the meeting then terminated with a cordial vote of thanks to 
Professor Foster, Dr. R. Hogg, and other members of the Council who had 
assisted in the scheme. 
Forestry in the Sandwich Islands. —Considerable attention is 
being directed to forestry in these islands. A recent report says that a 
