June 5, 1884. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
447 
no duplication of the corona has taken place, for in the variety just 
referred to it is very clear from the different colours that the corona is 
split up. It has been said of N. Capax that the multiplication of parts 
is “ entirely confined to the perianth segments.” Viewed in the light 
revealed by the particular variety of N. Pseudo-Narcissus referred to, and 
some forms of double Telamonius, there is in my opinion very little 
ground for this assertion, and it apoears to be constructed upon a very 
superficial basis. Such stellate forms of double Telamonius I observe are 
not so vigorous, being much dwarfer when planted side by side with 
others, and there is also a greater uniformity of colour—indeed, more 
colour—than in the larger and more duplex forms ; but in all the varie¬ 
ties you get the peerless-like perfume. I may here repeat my question 
as to whether this results from mere increase of coloured segments, or 
has it been infused by cross-breeding from N. incomparabilis 1 
N. grandiplenus is a very full flower, more often than not freely 
mixed and tipped with green, and the flowers are almost too heavy to 
stand erect. N. lobularis plenus is a very doubtful name ; it evidently 
belongs to the Telamonius section, but has originated from a smaller 
flower, most likely from what is known as lobularis, which is in my 
others, which are, however, not so distinct; the first form is especially 
variable both in number of segments developed and the colour. Several 
other duplex forms might be mentioned, but as there is little difference 
of opinion respecting them it is unnecessary to occupy any more space. 
—T. 
IPOM2EA THOMSONIANA. 
IpomjeAS are great favourites amongst the best of roof-climbing 
plants for stoves, and several of them yield some of the richest tints of 
purple and crimson. There has, however, hitherto been a deficiency of 
light-coloured varieties, and that want, has been most admirably supplied 
by the Ipomasa Thomsoniana (fig. 104), which Mr. B. S. Williams has 
introduced. It resembles I. Horsfallise, and was regarded as a variety oE 
that until Dr. Masters determined it to be distinct, and honoured it with 
the above name. The flowers are larger than those of I. Horsfalliae, and 
are borne in handsome wreaths clustering closely along the branches at 
Fig. 104.— Iron^EA Thomsoniana. 
opinion only a major development of nanus, hence you generally get this 
variety from the continent under the name of N. nanus plenus. I had a 
variety from Mr. Barr under the name of N. lobularis plenus odoratis- 
simu=, but could not distinguish any difference between it and the 
ordinary form. 
There are at least three double forms of N. incomparabilis. 1, Which 
may be regarded as a duplex form of the typical N. incomparabilis ; the 
perianth divisions are sulphur, while the duplicated coronal segments 
are deep yellow. This is known as “ Eggs and Bacon.” 2, Perianth 
divisions sulphur, while the coronal segments are deep orange—a very 
striking contrast, rendering the flower very attractive ; known under the 
common name of “ Butter and Eggs.” This has, I think, originated from 
the variety aurantius. 3, Perianth division pale sulphur or creamy white, 
freely duplicated, while the pale coronal segments are but sparingly 
developed, the flower having a bold Rose-like appearance, and has pro¬ 
bably originated from the variety albus. All three are very handsome 
and vigorous varieties, and should be extensively grown ; the last is 
particularly desirable for pot culture. Beside these there are several 
every axil, and have a fine effect when the plants are trained to the roof 
of a stove. The flowers are beautifully formed, the limb being quite 
circular, contracted below into a funnel-shaped tube. The leaves are 
rich green, thick, and have three neat oval leaflets. It is undoubtedly a 
most welcome addition to our list of indoor climbing plants, and will in a 
few years become an inhabitant of many gardens. 
VINE GROWTHS. 
Since writing before on this subject I have referred to Mr. Pearson & 
book on the Vine, published at the Journal office in 1880, and I ask to be 
allowed to add that in it I do not find any mention whatever of the prac¬ 
tice recorded by “ A Kitchen Gardener” as being associated in Ins mind 
with Mr. Pearson’s practice. On the contrary, at page 19, Mr. Pearson 
recommends strong Vines to be cut back in the usual old way, and iseak 
ones to be cut down nearly to the bottom of the rafter. At page 21 he 
