May 15, 1884. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
379 
varieties to the size and awkwardness and “ flotheriness of 
some modern favourites. I do hope some of our nurserymen 
will this summer do what Mr. Cranston boldly did at the first 
bheSield National Show. He put up Madame Noman for twelve 
of any light Hose, and was first; and yet he told me afterwards 
that he thought the Judges must have lost their heads (and 
hearts too) over the pretty things. But, I ask, are we to give all 
cur prizes to Flemish cart horses, and reserve none for the 
graceful thoroughbreds, not to speak of the taking elegant little 
pony P 
And what about Teas? I remember two or three years ago 
Mr. Prince, on seeiug a huge but well-formed Anna Gilmer in 
my stand, saying, “ You gentlemen make a mistake in going in 
for large Teas; you thereby spoil your stands.” And, without 
wishing to detract from the excellence of the Teas as shown at 
South Kensington last July, yet I failed to see enough of the 
loveliness and—what should be—the sweet innocent look of 
Rosa indica odorata. We saw too much of the fully developed 
matron (and grand she was), but in some stands you looked in 
vain for “sweet and twenty.” The question that troubles me is 
this: Are we really improving the form of the Rose if Her 
Majesty is to be the ideal type P I think not, and though many 
exhibitors and the trade will not agree with me, yet I shall have 
the support of the discriminating mass of the lovers of our 
favourite flower. 
Mr. George Paul, in his catalogue, speaks of one of his 
Cheshunt-raised Roses as “not large, but a neat front-row 
flower.” I presume that Her Majesty would go to the back row, 
but I shall be curious to see how she holds her position even 
there.— J. A. W., Alderminster. 
SPECIAL SOCIETIES. 
At page 344 of your issue of the 1st inst. your correspondent, 
“ D., Deal," tells a story transparently intended to reflect both upon 
my pecuniary position and personal character. He says:—“Some 
time before Mr. Dodwell removed to Oxford I gathered from him that 
he was in much trouble and anxiety owing to pecuniary losses and a 
threatened action for libel. Some days after, in thinking over our con¬ 
versation, it suggested itself to me that it would be a graceful and 
acceptable thing to present him with a testimonial on the ground of the 
benefits he had conferred on floriculture ; but feeling that I was not a 
sufficiently old friend to put myself at the head of it, I wrote to 
Mr. Charles Turner, who cordially approved of it, and warmly took 
it up.” 
I protest against this dragging of matters purely personal before the 
public. It is as destructive to honourable journalism as it is of individual 
right. I seek no immunity from criticism or censure, whatever its severity, 
which the performance of public duty may call, or seem to call for ; but 
I protest against the degradation of controversy by attempted reflections 
on character and position ; and I protest on public grounds, for these 
shameful things do not touch me to my hurt, whatever they may do to 
your correspondent. 
As to the facts. The story of the conversation told by your cor¬ 
respondent is an absolute myth. He never was a confidant of my 
private affairs, and I never at any time made reference to them either in 
conversation or by letter, save as a consolatory rejoinder to some com¬ 
plaint of his. It is true that by the bad faith of a business connection I 
did lose virtually the fruits of the labour of my life ; it is true also that 
for daring to vindicate my pood name, as one of the incidents of my 
misfortune, I was threatened with proceedings for libel, but the matter 
ended in threats, and the evil inflicted upon me recoiled with ruinous 
severity upon the wrong doers. But this occurred in July, 1878, and, 
as I was informed, no mention was heard of any offering to me until 
after my announced departure from Clapham in September, 1881. Your 
correspondent’s description of that offering also materially differs from 
that given me by others, but this is of small account. What is of 
account, of paramount account in my judgment, is, that he should be 
allowed to exercise his habit of attacking men or things under disguises 
more or less misleading to the uninstructed, in your columns, and 
whatever the subject, dragging in elements which envenom but never 
enlighten the controversy. What answer is his story of my pecuniary 
losses to the charge of my being a nurseryman, which he says I assume 
he made against me under the signature of “ Fair Play ? ” Let him 
come into the open, and there shall be no question of evidence, and I 
6hall have no hard words for opinions however adverse, openly expressed, 
and clearly the result of conviction, however mistaken ; but as long as 
I can hold a pen or speak a word I will not cease to denounce anonymous 
detraction.—E. S. Dodwell, Oxford. 
[We print Mr. Dodwell’s letter verbatim, with the observation that 
his floral dyuamite is harmless, and hence his references to ourselves, 
whatever may be his object, have no effect whatever. We have 
received a letter from “ E. R. N.,” founded on the false assumption 
that “D., Deal," committed a breach of faith in his communication on 
the page referred to. This Mr. Dodwell emphatically disproves in the 
words—“he, (‘ D., Deal,") never was a confidant of my private affairs.” 
Mr. Dodwell frankly and openly made his friends acquainted with 
his circumstances. He made no secret of them in conversation, and 
he received, as he knows, sympathy from ourselves and from others. 
After the publication of Mr. Dodwell’s speech delivered at the Auricula 
Show, and a still more trenchant circular in reference to him, “ D.. Deal," 
felt himself compelled to show that, instead of beiDg animated by per¬ 
sonal enmity towards Mr. Dodwell, he had acted as a friend in disguise. 
“An Amateur” has also written to us under the mistaken view that 
“ D., Deal," was Mr. Dodwell’s confidant, and concludes—“If your 
correspondent ‘ D., Deal,' wishes to promote the interests of floriculture, 
he can easily do so. No better proof of his ability in this respect could 
be afforded than his able and interesting review of the late Auricula 
Show in your last number. In this way he is amply qualified to give us 
pleasure and instruction, but emanations like that at page 344 are only 
calculated to give pain to everybody.” 
Mr. Dodwell has fired his shot and ought to be satisfied. Whether he 
is or not, we cannot allow any more to be said on this purely personal 
matter, which has grown out of a very proper discussion connected with 
special societies. On this subject we shall be pleased still to offer space 
to those who wish to continue it, but we firmly decline to give publicity 
to any mere personalities. It is on this account that letters from three 
other correspondents are not inserted, two of which disapprove of Mr. 
Dodwell’s action, and one sustaining it. Letters that are not suitable 
for insertion in the columns of the press can he printed and circulated 
through the post.] 
WULFENIA CARINTHIACA. 
Of the numerous alpine plants now at the disposal of the lover of 
these floral gems there are not many possessing greater claim to atten¬ 
tion than this beautiful little plant. To some of our readers the Wulfenia 
carinthiaca is probably an “ old familiar face; ” hut it is much less 
extensively grown than might, perhaps, be inferred from the mere date 
of its introduction. In the front ranks of the mixed border its spikes of 
bright blue flowers produce a charming effect, especially when grown, as 
it may he, in a good patch, or if several plants of it are grouped together.. 
It may be termed a spring flower, for it usually commences blossoming 
in May and continues in bloom until July. 
The Wulfenia carinthiaca is a perennial plant of dwarf habit, its 
foliage, which is all radical, not exceeding 6 inches ; the flower scapes* 
however, often grow to the height of from 12 to 16 inches or more before 
the blossoms are all expanded. The leaves are obovate, blunt, with 
doubly crenate margins, and when full grown are spread flat on the 
ground; the small leaflets attached to the flower scape are more acute 
and sessile, with their margins rolled back. 
The spike of flowers is at first drooping, but afterwards becomes 
nearly erect, though there is generally a slight inclination to one side. 
The flowers are bright blue, with a yellow throat, on short peduncles, 
closely arranged, and are somewhat remarkable for their oblique position. 
From the character of its natural habitat it will be readily inferred 
that the Wulfenia is an excellent rock plant, but it will not endure full 
