28 JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. [ January u uses. 
less to pack together through the winter, and have not to look after 
new sticks in the spring of the year. The Peas take to the netting 
very well, but it is not so good in windy weather, as I fancy the 
wind blowing the stems about cause them to cut on the thin wire.— 
W. S., Isle of Man. 
MAYFIELD, FALKIRK. 
Recently Mr. Burbidge, than whom there is no better judge, 
when writing about Orchids said, that of all the collections he had 
seen, the original one at Mayfield, so far as culture was concerned, 
surpassed them all. Another, equally qualified, once in our hearing 
pronounced the same collection the finest in Europe. This was 
proved when they were sold at Stevens’s rooms seven years ago, for 
the prices have never been reached by any others. When it became 
known throughout the country that that famous collection was to be 
dispersed universal regret was experienced ; for it was felt, more 
particularly in Scotland, that “ take it all in all, we ne’er shall look 
upon its like again.” Possibly Mr. Russell, the owner, thought 
otherwise, for no sooner was the original collection dispersed than he 
again commenced the formation of an even more extensive and 
representative one. Again Mayfield has renewed its fame as one of 
the most famous of Orchid-growing places, and again the collection 
will, so we hear, be sold by auction. As was noticed in these columns 
lately, the owner of this fine place recently died, and his successors 
have determined to part with all the more valuable plants, including 
not only the whole of the indoor, but most of the outdoor plants as 
well. This we doubly regret, for nowhere, at least in the midland 
counties of Scotland, is there another garden so richly stocked with 
trees, shrubs, and other plants. 
We have often visited Mayfield and taken notes, but often as our 
visits were, we always saw something new or worth noting, as must 
always be the case whenever good collections of plants are so 
well managed as those at Mayfield have been under the talented 
Mr. Sorely. 
In a recent visit our attention was called first to the Camellia 
house. Until a year or two ago this house was filled with the noblest 
Tree Ferns and Palms, many of them grand specimens. On their 
dispersal the house was filled with Camellias from an older house 
which was too small for the advancing specimens. So large were 
some of these that no little ingenuity had to be exercised in lifting 
and conveying them in safety from one house to the other. The skill 
which has accomplished so much besides overcame the difficulties in 
the way, and now the huge bushes are in the most robust health 
and bearing loads of their indispensable flowers. At the time of our 
visit only a few were to be seen, for quantities are daily cut and 
placed in wreaths on the grave of their late owner. 
While among them we took the names of a few of the best. Mrs. 
A. Wilder seems to be a collection in itself, for side by side with 
blooms of snowy whiteness could be seen others of different 
shades of salmon and carnation. Among the older and generally 
valued varieties Countess Lavinia Maggii may be named, along with 
Mathiona alba and M. Rosea, Roi Leopoldi and Reine des Fleurs. 
Candidissima is perhaps the finest of whites, and Pistonii and Rubens 
are specially good in a half-opened state for buttonholes. Among 
newer kinds we noticed Mrs. A. M. Hovey and C. M. Hovey. 
In the next house which we entered were a great number of 
Orchids not long imported, but breaking finely. In this house were 
also many forms of Lycaste Skinnerii, including all the varieties 
named in Mr. Williams’s Manual. The Odontoglossum house next 
claims attention. It is simply an old wooden shed with a glass roof, and 
was once an old greenhouse for keeping bedding plants over winter. 
This does not prevent the Odontoglossums growing vigorously, 
although it cost much trouble a year ago to keep the temperature a 
degree or two above freezing. Not often, if ever, can plants of the 
same age be seen with such pseudo-bulbs and such spiles. Though 
our time was very limited we counted the flowers on one plant that 
three years ago was a solitary imported pseudo-bulb. The number 
was fifty, borne on three spikes. The kind was 0. Alexandras. Many 
other grand varieties were flowering or showing two or even three 
spikes from one pseudo-bulb of extraordinary vigour. To name all 
worth naming would tire your readers and produce a catalogue, which 
we do not intend doing ; but the following were so fine that we 
cannot refrain from naming them. 0. Andersonianum, 0. nebulosum 
(very large pseudo-bulb), 0. triumphans and t. alba, 0. Pescatorei, 
0. Rossii majus, 0. violacea, and Sophronitis grandiflora. Masde- 
vallias were also grand. 
In the vestibule of the two Cattleya houses very noticeable are the 
tubs of Coelogyne cristata. Plants like these we have never seen, 
and they could not be surpassed ; more than a yard in diameter and 
composed of numberless pseudo-bulbs as large as ducks’ eggs, such 
plants produce an enormous number of glorious blooms in early 
spring. Here also are plants of Dendrobium thyrsiflorum and 
D. Walkerianum, with stems between 2 and 3 feet long and as stout 
as an ordinary ruler. We noticed also Odontoglossum naevium majus 
in very fine condition. Here also are to be seen specimens of Cypri- 
pedium caudatum in magnificent condition. 
Among the Cattleyas we can only select a few from the great 
numbers which meet the view. Those we noted are Cattleya War- 
neri in fine health ; C. Warcewiczii, C. delicata superba, very fine ; 
C. Morgani; C. exoniensis, one of the finest of the varieties ; C. Dow- 
aniana ; C. gigas, and a better variety of C. Warneri than that 
figured in Warner’s magnificent work. Here also are many varieties 
of C. Trianai, including a fine piece of the rare and original C. T. 
Russelliana. In the Cattleya house we also noticed an extraordinary 
healthy plant of Coelogyne cristata Lemoniana, which has the curious 
and valuable character of flowering from the top of the pseudo-bulbs 
in autumn, and in the ordinary way in spring. Mr. Sorely places 
much value on this plant. 
Cymbidium Lowianum had thirty blooms on a spike, and C. Mas- 
tersianum in the form of a huge bush. Here also was the one plant in 
cultivation of Pescatorea Russelliana, and which is prized accord¬ 
ingly. Cypripedium Sedeni and C. insigne Maulei are scattered 
throughout these houses, and all are fine. Anguloa eburnea, a rare and 
beautiful pure white form, is also doing extremely well, and is sure to 
be sought after. Dawson’s variety of Huntleya marginata we noticed 
in excellent condition. 
In the East Indian house is a magnificent collection of Yandas, 
Angrsecums, Saccokbiums, &c., in fine health; the plants being 
furnished with foliage to the surface of the pots. Most of the plants 
are young, but in better health they could not be. We can only 
notice one or two. Saccolabium Blumei had twenty-six leaves ; 
Cypripedium Parishii, which few manage well, had seven blooms on 
a spike. A fine piece of the original Laslia elegans Warneri was note¬ 
worthy. Cypripedium insigne Chantini is perhaps the most beauti¬ 
ful and vigorous variety of that old favourite. C. Haynauldianum is 
also fine, and the same may be said of Vanda Cathcarti, which had 
the remains of a spike with five withered flowers ; Y. Denisoniana 
(true), Y. retusa, Y. suavis (Yeitch’s variety), V. Lowii, Y. tricolor 
Russelliana (another, newer, and rarer variety than that noticed in 
Williams’ Manual, and which is in Sir T. Lawrence’s collection), and 
quite a host of others far too numerous to mention. 
We intended noticing a few of the outdoor features, but find that 
this must be left for a future occasion. Meanwhile we urge on all 
who have heard of the fame of Mayfield, and who may have purposed 
visiting it one day, but have not yet done so, to do so at once, for 
soon the Mayfield they have heard of will cease to exist.— Visitor. 
MIMULUS CARDINALIS AND ITS VARIETIES. 
Being interested in this useful hardy plant, which I grow in 
several forms, I have referred to “ Maund’s Botanic Garden,” the 
pictures in which were the wonder and the delight of my boyhood, 
in order to find the figure of the variety mentioned by “ Dublin- 
ensis ” on page 13 of the Journal of Horticulture. I find it to be 
No. 813 of Maund’s illustrations ; and as the description in Maund 
is not quite as “ Dublinensis ” gives it, I hope he will excuse me 
for correcting him. Maund says that M. roseo-cardinalis, which 
he figures and calls “ The Scotch Hybrid Mimulus,” originated in 
the vicinity of Edinburgh, whence he received it in 1840. He 
adds that it is quite distinct from Hudson’s hybrid Mimulus, which 
is one of several varieties raised in the Bury St. Edmunds Botanic 
Garden in 1837. He also says that the variety he figures is a 
hybrid between Mimulus roseus and M. cardinalis, and was known 
to London nurserymen as atro-rosea and Maclearii. Now M. car¬ 
dinalis is not included in Loudon’s “ Encyclopedia of Plants” 
published in 1829, and is said on other authority to have been in¬ 
troduced from California, 1835. So that these hybrids, if hybrids 
they are, must have been raised directly it was introduced. 
The next question is, What is M. roseus, with which M. cardi- 
nalis is said to have been crossed ? Perhaps “ Dublinensis ” can 
tell me this, for I find in the “ Cottage Gardener’s Dictionary ” 
that a half-hardy M. roseus was introduced from California in 
1831 ; but I have had for three or four years a rose-coloured 
Mimulus, which I call M. cardinalis var. roseus, differing from the 
type only in the colour of the flowers, and having been, like it, 
perfectly hardy through the last three winters. Twenty-five 
years ago I bought a rose-coloured variety of M. cardinalis under 
the name of M. Reidi. The flower was of a better colour than 
that I have now, and also a better shape, in this respect resembling 
M. luteus. I kept it for many years, but lost every plant of it 
during the dry summer of 1868, and could never meet with it 
again. Two years ago I asked Miss Hope of Wardie Lodge 
whether she had it. She once had a similar variety, probably the 
one figured by Maund, but she, too, had lost it. Probably these 
varieties have died out. The flower I sent to “ Dublinensis ” 
last summer was from a plant 1 bought from Mr. Ware two years 
ago under the name of “ Crimson King.” It has in all respects the 
habit and leaf of M. cardinalis, differing only in the colour of the 
flower. “ Dublinensis ” remarks that this was no doubt a cross¬ 
bred plant. Without knowing the half-hardy M. roseus I can 
hardly form an opinion ; but it did not occur to me that the plant 
was a hybrid, the colour being such as I should think might be 
produced by the mixture of the scarlet and the rose colour of the 
