January 12, 1882. ] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 27 
tion. If this is capable of swelling the stems and forming roots 
in sufficient quantities to meet all the requirements of the Vines 
at the commencement of the next season, why grow a houseful of 
growth only to materially exhaust the borders and then be cut 
away again ? Surely the houses and even the borders can be 
turned to a better purpose for a time. 
It must be remembered or be understood (this for new readers) 
we are holding an argument upon the relative merits of the 
different systems adopted with young Vines, moderate restriction 
being opposed to unrestriction.—W. Iggulden. 
[As there appears to be a general desire that the discussion of 
this subject should as much as possible be left in the hands of 
Mr. Taylor and “ Single-handed ” at present, we reproduce con¬ 
cisely the points at issue, and which we fear a number of side 
issues more or less relevant have somewhat obscured. On page 
383, October 27th, 1881, Mr. Iggulden based an argument on the 
following example :— 
“ An expensive border is made. Vines are planted during the early 
part of the year and encouraged to grow as freely as possible, even to 
forming a thicket all over the house, including the back walls. This 
is done with the idea of filling the border with roots in proportion to 
the top growth. But what is the use of encouraging all this growth 
of roots—roots of the grossest kind—which quickly rob the borders 
of their fertility, when the whole, or nearly the whole, of the top 
growth at pruning time is cut away ? ” 
That is Mr. Iggulden’s case. He objects first to an unrestricted 
and, as he presumes, needlessly luxuriant growth the first season, 
followed by very close pruning. In reply to this Mr. Bardney 
says on page 420, November 10th, 1881 :— 
“ I stop the young Vines when about 9 inches high until they make 
roots. They are then allowed to grow as much and as fast as they 
can, even if they resemble a thicket at the top of the house, the 
laterals only being pinched up to the place where the leader was 
stopped the second time.” 
That is Mr. Bardney’s case, and he emphasises it on page 499, 
December 1st, 1881, by citing the following from Mr. William 
Thomson’s work on the Vine :— 
“ Young Vines not thicker than a quill were planted. All the buds 
were allowed to grow, producing in some instances ten rods to one 
Vine, all of which during the season ran to the top of the house and 
partly down the back wall, a distance of 30 feet. When they were 
cut down the house was a perfect thicket of wood. The Vines were/ 
cut down to within a foot of the front sashes, and two rods were 
trained from each the following season for fruiting.” 
Thus the matter stands. Mr. Taylor supported the former 
theory, and “Single-handed” the latter. They can both, no 
doubt, advance reasons for their practice that will be instructive 
to others. Let them discuss the question on its merits without 
prejudice and reference to what has been said in the past and 
somewhat mixed controversy, Mr. Taylor to open the question 
from his point of view.— Ed.J 
CHRYSANTHEMUMS AS CUT ELOWERS. 
While cutting some Chrysanthemum blooms recently, the 
thought occurred to me that a note on the varieties which are 
yielding flowers at this season might be useful. The following 
gave their first flowers—that is, from the end of the leading shoots 
—Princess Teck and Mr. Gladstone, both incurved ; Fleur de 
Marie, Miss Margaret, and Empress, Anemone-flowered ; Cry 
Kang, Purple Prince, Japanese, and Julie Lagrav&re, reflexed. 
The following yielded a second crop of flowers from side shoots— 
viz., Lady Slade, Venus, Mrs. Shipman, and General Bainbridge, 
large-flowered ; Criterion, To Kio, Peter the Great, Elaine, Marie 
Lemoine, Fair Maid of Guernsey, and Bouquet Fait, Japanese ; 
and Beautd du Nord, reflexed ; George Sand, Marginatum, and 
Princess Louise, Anemone-flowered; Baronne du Prailly, Bed 
Dragon, and some of Cry Kang, Japanese, have yet unopened. 
Of Pompons Golden Cedo Nulli, Antonius, President, Perle, 
Madame Montels, and Mustapha afforded flowers for cutting. 
Four hundred fresh flowers have been gathered this week, 1200 
from Christmas week, and we have still many hundreds to gather 
as required. 
The Chrysanthemum has occupied a very prominent place for 
several years in the houses here, both as a decorative plant and as 
a producer of flowers for cutting, nor has it ever been known to 
fail to respond to our simple treatment. Though I should not 
recommend so many varieties as we have here to gardeners 
whose sole aim is to procure flowers for cutting, as I have been 
placed in this position, that variety and large blooms up to the 
florist standard were as much requisite as the flowers themselves 
for furnishing purposes. However, were cut flowers alone a re¬ 
quisite and^ plenty of them, the varieties I should select would be 
these—namely, Mrs. George Bundle, Mr. George Glenny, Elaine, 
Beaute du Nord, Julie Lagravbre, refer the Great, James Salter, 
and probably Miss Margaret for veiy late blooms. If purple 
flowers were in request I would add Prince of Wales and Purple 
Prince. 
With the exception of the cluster of buds at the ends of the 
main shoots of some of the varieties, I would allow the plants to 
bear as many flowers as they could. Bich feeding would bring 
the flowers to a good size. If small flowers are not objected to, 
some of the Anemone Pompons might be grown : these are very 
pretty. Golden Cedo Nulli in its way is quite as beautiful as Mr. 
G. Glenny. Madame Montels is a lovely flower, and Antonius is 
also worth growing for cut flowers. 
The cuttings may be struck at any time up to May, but now is 
the time to insert them if the largest possible quantity of flowers 
is wanted. I employ very little heat, use short healthy cuttings, 
and when rooted grow the plants in a cool and airy position. I 
cannot obtain too strong soil for them, nor press it too firmly into 
the pots, nor injure the plants with liquid manure, when once the 
roots have a firm hold in the soil.—A Nor’-Easter. 
Wire Netting for Peas. —Some time ago a correspondent sought 
information on this subject. In May, 1879,1 purchased of Messrs. J. 
B. Brown Co. 50 yds. 4-inch-mesh 18w.g. galvanised wire netting, 
3 feet high, for 12s. 6d., for supporting Peas in lieu of sticks. The 
netting is supported with wood sticks 4 feet long, 1J by 1J inch, the 
foot tapered, charred in the fire, and dipped into coal tar while hot, 
placed about 4 feet apart. The wood sticks and the wire netting are 
now nearly as good as new. I would recommend a stronger wire, 
say 16w.G., and a larger mesh than 2-inch, as this is too small for 
passing the hand through for gathering the inside Peas. I used two 
rows of netting— i.e., one row on each side of the Peas, the same as 
using sticks. I like the netting quite as well as sticks. We have 
