JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
April 28, 1881. ] 
Prince of Greens ; third Mr. T. Mellor, Ashton-under-Lyne, with 
Ringleader, Reliance, a seedling green edge short of body, and a 
seedling self; fourth Mr. Edward Pohlman, fifth Mr. S. Barlow, and 
sixth Mr. William Bolton. 
Class C, two dissimilar varieties.—First Mr. J. Booth with Acme 
and Dr. Horner; second Mr. E. Pohlman with a good seedling self 
and New Green (Headly); third Mr. W. Bolton with a seedling self 
and Alexander Meiklejohn; fourth Mr. S. Barlow ; fifth Mr. J. Bes- 
wick, Middleton ; sixth Mr. Thomas Mellor, and seventh Mr. B. 
Simonite. 
Class D, pail's for maiden growers, dissimilar in class and variety. 
—First Mr. Edward Shepley, Middleton, with Rev. G. Jeans, Pizarro ; 
second Mr. George Geggie, Waterloo Nursery, Bury, with General 
Niel and Mrs. Sturrock. 
Alpines. —Class E, four dissimilar varieties.—First Mr. J. Beswick 
with Goliath of the Alps, Conspicua, Dolly Yarden, and Diadem ; 
second Mr. T. Mellor with Conspicua, Dazzle, Diadem, and Ovid ; 
third Mr. S. Barlow with Brightness, Beatrice, Spangle, and Mercury; 
fourth Mr. E. Pohlman, fifth R. Gorton, Esq., sixth Mr. J. Booth, 
and seventh Mr. W. Brockbank. 
Single Plants. —Class F, green edges.—First and third Mr. Booth 
with Colonel Taylor ; second, fourth, and fifth Mr. B. Simonite with 
a seedling, Lovely Ann, and Talisman ; sixth Mr. Mellor with No. 5 
seedling ; seventh and ninth Mr. Barlow with seedlings, and eighth 
Mr. Brockbank with Admiral Napier. Class G, grey edges.—First, 
second, third, fourth, and sixth Mr. Mellor with Ringleader, Confi¬ 
dence, General Bollivar, and John Waterston ; fifth, seventh, and 
eighth Mr. Barlow with a seedling, C.E. Brown, and Complete ; ninth 
Mr. Bolton with George Lightbody. Class H, white edges.—First, 
third, and sixth Mr. Mellor with seedlings and John Simonite ; second 
and fifth Mr. Booth with Acme and Mrs. Headly ; seventh Mr. 
Brockbank with Frank Simonite ; eighth Mr. B. Simonite with 
R. Dean ; and ninth Mr. Pohlman with Bright Yenus. Class I, seifs. 
—First, fourth, and ninth Mr. Mellor with seedlings, second Mr. 
Pohlman with a seedling, third Mr. Shaw with C. J. Perry, fifth 
Mr. R. Gorton with Blackbird, sixth and eighth Mr. Booth with 
Ellen Lancaster and Marquis of Lome. Class K, Alpines, single 
plants with yellow centres.—First, second, and fourth Mr. Pohlman 
with seedlings, third Mr. Beswick with Dazzle, fifth Mr. Shaw with 
Ovid, and sixth Mr. R. Gorton with Alexander Meiklejohn. Class L, 
Alpines, with white centres.—First Mr. Pohlman with a seedling, 
second Mr. Beswick with Conspicua, third Mr. Gorton with Beatrice, 
fourth Mr. Booth with a seedling, fifth and sixth Mr. Barlow with 
Little Annie and Elcho. The premier Auricula was Prince of Greens 
above noticed. 
Polyanthuses. —Class M, black grounds, three dissimilar varieties.— 
First Mr. John Beswick with Congleton Queen, a seedling, and Lan¬ 
cashire Hero ; second Mr. S. Barlow with President, Exile, and John 
Bright; third Mr. William Brockbank with Lancashire Hero, Exile, 
and Cheshire Favourite; fourth Mr. William Bolton, and fifth Mr. T. 
Mellor. Class N, red grounds, three dissimilar varieties.—First Mr. 
John Beswick with Lancer, George IV., and Unknown : second Mr. S. 
Barlow with Walsall Seedling, Firefly, and Sunrise ; third Mr. Brock¬ 
bank with Prince Regent, William IY., and George IV.; fourth Mr. 
William Bolton. 
Class 0, single plants, red grounds.—First, second, sixth, and 
seventh, Mr. Barlow, with Sunrise, Walsall Seedling, and Firefly ; 
third Mr. Shipley with William IY. fourth and eighth Mr. Bes¬ 
wick with George IV. and Unknown ; fifth Mr. Geggie with Prince 
Regent. Class P, single plants, red grounds.—First Mr. Brownhill 
with Cheshire Favourite, second and third Mr. Beswick with Cheshire 
Favourite and Lancashire Hero ; fourth, fifth, and sixth, Mr. Shipley 
with President, Exile, and F. D. Horner; seventh and eighth, Mr. 
Barlow with a seedling and John Bright. 
Extra classes.—Class Q, for twelve dissimilar Fancy Auriculas. 
—First Mr. S. Barlow, second and third Mr. Wm. Bolton. Class R, 
for twelve dissimilar Fancy Polyanthuses.—First, second, and third 
Mr. H. Brownhill, Sale. Class S for twelve dissimilar Primroses.— 
First, second, and third Mr. Wm. Brockbank. 
The miscellaneous collections of plants were particularly handsome, 
especially the Azaleas from Messrs. Jno. Standish & Co., whilst the 
blooms of Gardenias and Rose Niphetos were superb. Messrs. Robt. 
P. Kerr & Sons of Liverpool showed a fine collection of miscellaneous 
plants, and generally the stove and greenhouse plants were of good 
quality. Other exhibitors of miscellaneous groups were Mr. B. S. 
Williams, Upper Holloway, London ; Messrs. Dickson, Brown, & Tait; 
and Mr. Brownhill of Sale. 
EXHIBITING ROSES—WHAT IS AN AMATEUR? 
A correspondent on page 292 wishes the National Rose So¬ 
ciety to define what an amateur is ; but, as you say, there is no 
doubt that “ an amateur is one who grows plants, but not for sale.” 
I suppose your correspondent is alluding to the practice of some 
large amateur growers of Roses who dispose of their surplus stock 
by selling it. No doubt the practice is one to be discouraged, but I 
think the question is a very difficult one. For what are the great 
amateurs to do ? Their ground after all is limited, and their 
plants are numbered by the thousand. Every year they are 
obliged, not only to buy new varieties, but to bud a large quantity 
3B3 
of stocks with old varieties. They find their ground quite full, 
when they every day expect their new lot to be delivered. 
It is a question of getting rid of a few hundreds of old plants, 
and as the expenses of Rose-growing are very great they naturally 
wish to obtain a little money, so if they can find a purchaser they 
do ; if not, they give them away. At the same time they are 
running a great risk in having their claim to the title of amateurs 
disputed. An instance of this is present to my mind as I write 
in a very flagrant case. But what was the end of it ? A great 
nurseryman interfered very properly, and said the amateur was 
in reality a nurseryman, and could not show in the former’s 
classes. The Committee endorsed this, and the result was that 
the amateur became a regular nurseryman, issued his catalogues, 
and is exactly like the rest of the trade. 
But this was an exceptional case, and I do not think, so far 
as my experience goes, that at present the evil is great enough to 
cause the Committee of the National Rose Society any trouble. 
Perhaps your correspondent will go more into detail, when we 
shall be able to judge better of the matter.— Wyld Savage. 
SMALL FRUIT AND ITS PROFITS. 
In corroboration of Mr. Edward Luckhurst’s article on fruit¬ 
growing for market (page 308), I venture to communicate the fact 
that 5 d. per pound is what I have been in the habit for years of 
paying for Black Currants. Once only they were as low as 3d. ; at 
all times they are scarce and little grown. Raspberries are Id. a 
pint. Both these fruits we may say have semi-medicinal qualities, 
besides their value for kitchen and table. What can be more 
delicious as a temperance beverage than Raspberry vinegar, a 
tablespoonful in a half pint spring water ? and as a preserve the 
Raspberry will retain all but its original aroma for two years. 
But if “frost and cold winds” jeopardise the blooms of our 
fruit trees, much more do small birds ravage and destroy our 
bushes and canes ; protection is almost impossible.—A. M. B. 
REVIEW OF BOOK. 
Improved Pruning and Training of Fruit Trees, or Extension, 
versus Restriction. By John Simpson. London: 37, South¬ 
ampton Street, Covent Garden. 
The author of this small volume of 115 pages tells us that he 
“ regards fruit culture from a purely utilitarian point of view,” 
and he advocates what he calls the “extension ” system of train¬ 
ing. He abhors “fantastic methods of training, and the incessant 
prunings, pinchings, and root-prunings that these methods entail; ” 
and he thinks, and most people will agree with him, that “ a tree 
that can be grown in the shortest time and preserved in health 
and fertility the longest must surely be the best.” 
Years ago, before glass structures were so numerous and flowers 
in and out doors did not absorb the gardener’s thought to anything 
like the extent they do now, more attention was given to fruit trees, 
and grand and fruitful specimens on walls were produced under 
a judicious system of pruning and training. We have as great an 
objection as the author has to stunted and distorted specimens ; 
but we cannot ignore the value of pruning, nor do we like to con¬ 
template the appearance of fruit trees grown in gardens if this 
“extension” system were solely and in many instances roughly 
(as must necessarily be the case), carried out. We readily admit 
that trees will form natural fruit spurs when the branches are not 
stopped, and we are aware that by injudicious pruning much fruit 
is sacrificed. With all this we have been familiar for years before 
Mr. Simpson appears to have made a special study of the matter ; 
but we also know that “Nature’s plan” if carried out in its 
integrity for a number of years will result in naked branches at the 
base, as all the orchard trees of matured age and all the forest trees 
that adorn the landscape show in the most conclusive manner. 
More than thirty years ago we published the following brief 
instructions on the subject of pruning :—“After thinning out the 
shoots a little shortening of them must be attended to, at least 
whilst the tree is young and in the course of formation. Never¬ 
theless, it must be remembered what is the object in view. Short¬ 
ening contributes nothing to the health of the tree, nothing to its 
fruit-bearing properties. It is, in fact, an adjunct of a dwarfing 
system, being an attempt to limit the ultimate size of trees, in 
order to prevent them in gardens from attaining an orchard size 
and character ; ” and even when it was for a special purpose 
found necessary to “ limit the size ” of trees by shortening the 
branches a slight pruning of the roots was at the same time advo¬ 
cated. Again, in referring to the principles of pruning we have 
recorded that “ thinning-out the growths is necessary, in order to 
admit or equalise the amount of light and air to the bearing wood, 
