April 20, 1882.] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
815 
20th 
21st 
Tn 
F 
Birmingham Spring Show. (Second day.) 
22nd 
S 
Royal Botanic Society, 3.45 r.M. 
23rd 
SUN 
2nd Sunday after Easter. 
24th 
M 
[11 A M. National Anricula Society’s Show. 
25th 
Tu 
Royal Horticultural Society, Fruit and Floral Committees at 
26th 
W 
Royal Botanic Society’s Second Spring Show. 
DAHLIAS. 
HATEVER objections may be raised against the 
Dahlia, whether on account of its tenderness, 
its strong growth, its lack of agreeable per¬ 
fume, or the transiency of its period of beauty, 
it must certainly rank among the grandest of 
autumn flowers ; and it is not unlikely that 
more attention will be devoted to the culture 
of the plants now that encouragement is being 
given by the inauguration of a national show of their 
noble blooms. 
Dahlias are certainly tender, so are many other plants that 
are employed for the embellishment of gardens, and which 
need glass structures and hot-water apparatus for preserving 
them during the winter. These the flowers under notice do 
not require, therefore let not the objection of tenderness be 
unduly magnified. Dahlias are certainly of strong, even some 
of them of a luxuriant, habit of growth ; but there are posi¬ 
tions in gardens which only plants of this character can appro¬ 
priately occupy. They are not intended for carpet beds nor 
the front rows of ribbon borders, but in proper situations how 
fine they are ! and of late years there have been no beds more im¬ 
posing than the large circles in the grounds of the Crystal Palace 
when gay with these flowers. They are not sweet, neither 
are French and African Marigolds and Camellias, yet their 
symmetry, massiveness, and brightness insure their retention 
in gardens. They are late in flowering it is true, but are they 
wanted earlier? The beauty of a garden consists in the floral 
changes that are ever occurring, and Dahlias come soon enough 
if they do not always last long enough ; while even as regards 
their transiency, the objection, such as it is, applies with equal 
force to Hyacinths and Tulips, Auriculas, Carnations, and 
Chiysanthemums. No flower possesses all the charms in com¬ 
bination any more than any one man possesses all the accom¬ 
plishments and his wife all the virtues. Let us, therefore, not 
be too searching after faults in judging the flowers under notice, 
but be fair in our estimate by recognising some of their merits 
and claims to attention at the hands of cultivators. 
The Dahlia should command respect, as the finest types em¬ 
body and represent in a very striking manner the skill of man. 
Let those who are old enough to do so bring to mind the ragged- 
petalled gaudy-eyed flowers of the past, and compare them 
with the perfectly cupped florets and splendid symmetry of 
the blooms of to-day, and let them reflect how much thought, 
labour, care, and watchfulness have been exercised in effecting 
the wonderful transformation. It is not to be expected, nor 
even desired, that everybody will consider this great change an 
improvement. They think the single flowers more attractive 
than the double. Very well, let them enjoy them ; but they 
must still admit improvement, for there are more single Dahlias 
now than was ever known before in the history of flowers— 
plants of better habit, more floriferous, with a greater variety 
of colours and far more beautiful flowers than were ever 
previously seen. Let, then, the Dahlia be respected, not 
contemned. 
In the garden the plants have a beauty all their own—a 
beauty that can be seen without the aid of an eye-glass; and 
what flowers can equal their noble blooms for church and har¬ 
vest festivals, and other ceremonial or domestic adornments ? 
Both doubles and singles are alike in requisition for these pur¬ 
poses, and hundreds of persons endure the humiliation of beg¬ 
ging blooms each year who have the means for growing them. 
Then look at the blooms in the show-room as we hope to see 
them at the Crystal Palace in September, and say if any other 
flowers are more imposing. As forming a special show the 
Rose overshadows all flowers, as a queen should. An Auricula 
show is delicate and dainty, even lovely ; a Carnation show 
trim, chaste, and even charming ; a Chrysanthemum show 
bright and beautiful ; but a first-class Dahlia show is grand. 
In consequence of the absorbing character of the style of 
flower gardening that has flourished during the past quarter of 
a century Dahlias have been too much neglected. Many gar¬ 
deners just reaching manhood know little or nothing of the 
history of the plant, and very briefly it may be referred to. 
Botanists are now mostly agreed that the florist’s Dahlias 
have originated from two species, D. superflua and D. frus- 
tranea, though some unite them under the name of D. vari- 
abilis—a very appropriate title, for the variation in form and 
colour of the flowers cause them to merge into each other, and 
it is not easy to indicate any clear marks of distinction. The 
chief character, however, which has been selected for this pur¬ 
pose is the involucre (the bracts surrounding the flowers), 
which in D. superflua is reflexed, and in D. frustranea is spread¬ 
ing. In other respects they are similar, having strong suc¬ 
culent stems, divided leaves, and flower heads in which the 
outer florets are flat, broad, spreading, and richly coloured, the 
central florets being tubular and yellow. Dahlias were first 
mentioned by Hernandez in his account of Mexico about the 
middle of the seventeenth century, and two figures are given 
under the Mexican names, with descriptions of their supposed 
medicinal properties. Some years subsequently a traveller in 
Mexico, named Menonville, who was, it is said, “ employed by 
the French minister to steal the cochineal insect from the 
Spaniards,” also noticed them, commenting on their great 
beauty. 
In 1789 plants of D. superflua were introduced to England 
by the Marchioness of Bute, and some were grown in Madrid 
at the same time, and among the latter the first one which 
flowered in the autumn of 1789 enabled Cavanilles, a Spanish 
botanist, to define the genus under the name of Dahlia pinnata, 
the genus being named in honour of Dahl, a pupil of Linnaeus, 
and the specific title referring to the form of the leaves, and 
this appears to be the D. superflua of succeeding authors. Two 
other forms also flowered in following years, and were respec¬ 
tively named D. rosea and D. coccinea, and all were figured in 
a botanical work published at the end of that century. The 
first plants introduced by the Marchioness of Bute appear to 
have been lost, and in 1804 seeds were sent by Lady Holland 
No. 95.—You IV., T ird Series. 
No. 1751 .—vol. LXYII., Old series. 
