JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
450 
[ June 1, 1882, 
the berry, but not larere in the bunch ; Mr. F. Faulkner, gardener to 
F. R. Leyland, Esq., Wootton Hall, Liverpool, second with Foster’s 
Seedling; and Mr. Miles third with the same variety. Mr. Wallis, 
Keele Hall, also exhibited Grapes new and old on the same stand, the 
latter being in a fresh state, with the footstalks quite green. 
Mr. McGaw, gardener to F. G. Summers, Esq., Park Hall, Hayfield, 
was the only exhibitor for two Pines, and was awarded a first prize. 
For one Pine C. Bailey, Esq., Maindiff Court, first, Mr. McGaw and 
Mr. Miles obtaining the remaining prizes, each exhibitor staging fine 
fruits, with the pips swelled to a good size. 
For twelve Strawberries in pots Mr. McGaw took the first award 
with President; Mr. J. Brown, Castle End, Kenilworth, followed with 
the same variety ; Mr. Upjohn, gardener to the Earl of Ellesmere, the 
third prize. Mr. Faulkner also showed well in this class. 
Miscellaneous. —The two largest of the groups not in competition 
were staged in the glass house containing the Orchids, forming a 
central bank. Mr. B. S. Williams had an extensive and beautiful 
collection comprising many choice Orchids and other plants. 
Hydrangea paniculata grandiflora, Nepenthes, Amaryllises, Ferns, 
and Azaleas were largely represented, several being certificated. The 
Liverpool Horticultural Company (Limited), Garston, also con¬ 
tributed a beautiful group of Crotons, Orchids, Dracaenas, Ferns, and 
numerous specimens of Pellionia Daveauana. Messrs. F. W. & H. 
Stansfield, Sale, had a choice collection of remarkably healthy hardy 
Ferns. An extra prize was awarded to Mr. Elphinstone for a group 
of well-flowered Roses of moderate size but extremely healthy. 
Messrs. J. Standish & Co. had two pretty groups of Japanese Maples 
near the entrance to the glass house, the best being sanguineum, 
palmatifidum, septemlobum, and dissectum ornatum. Mr. J. F. 
Barter, Harrow Road, London, had some very fine Mushrooms and 
samples of spawn. 
Implements were largely represented, considerable space being 
occupied with the exhibits by the following firms :—Messrs. Elliott, 
Alston, & Olney, 97, Deangate, Manchester, had a varied assortment 
of garden requirements, such as chairs, ladders, &c. ; Leech Bros, and 
Hoyle, 20 and 22. Old Millgate, had a number of lawn mowers, rollers, 
barrows, and boilers ; J. Bradford & Co., tents and ornamental vases ; 
R. Halliday & Co.. Middleton, greenhouses and frames ; Foster and 
Pearson, Beeston, Notts, various glass erections ; John Armitage and 
Son, ornamental pottery ; Wright & Holmes, Moseley Road, Birming¬ 
ham, greenhouses; David Lowe & Son, Manchester, chairs and 
houses ; Henry Inman, Stretford, rustic chairs and arbours ; J. G. 
Wagstafll, Dukinfield, boilers and heating apparatus ; and John Swain, 
Hyde, patent boilers. 
BARKERIA LINDLEYANA. 
Amonust autumn-flowering Orchids that represented in the ac¬ 
companying woodcut (fig. 89, p. 449) deserves a prominent position, 
especially for culture in a cool house, where with the other mem¬ 
bers of the genus, such as B. elegans, B. spectabilis, and B. Skin- 
neri, it thrives admirably if its few requirements are attended to 
judiciously. Free ventilation, abundance of water during growth, 
and a well-marked season of rest, when very little water is needed, 
are the chief points to which attention should be directed, and if 
proper care be afforded in these respects little difficulty will be 
experienced in obtaining good results. The plant succeeds best 
on a block, though it may be grown in a pot or shallow pan, but 
under the former system the most satisfactory results in regard to 
the production of flowers are attained. The blooms are of a rich 
purple-crimson hue with a little white in the lip, and they are 
produced in long spikes, rather less drooping than in some of the 
other species. At Messrs. Veitcb & Sons’ Chelsea nursery, amongst 
the numerous Orchids so well treated this was very fine last 
autumn, and from one of the plants there our figure was prepared. 
FERTILISERS—THE SOLUBILITY OF MANURES. 
Much that “ B.” has written at page 398 it is not necessary to 
discuss, but some points have been there raised that may be pro¬ 
fitably considered. The first is the price of potash in the form of 
chloride or sulphate. The pure sulphate is decidedly dear, but, as 
found in a good sample of kainit, it is cheap, more especially 
when the other matters associated with it are valued at the price 
they command in the market by themselves. “ B.” does not seem 
to be aware of the fact that chloride of potash is, perhaps, more 
difficult to procure pure than almost any other artificial manure, 
and is certainly as liable to adulteration as is the nitrate, and pos¬ 
sibly more so. Although a New York authority was quoted to 
show that chloride of potash had a tendency to produce inferior 
Potatoes, the same has been found to be the case in this country. 
Cameron, in the latest edition of Johnston’s “Agricultural Che¬ 
mistry,” quotes Ferguson to show that sulphate of potash was 
superior to the chloride for that crop. On other plants the chlo¬ 
ride has proved to have a more beneficial effect. A friend writes 
me to say that a slight sprinkling applied to his Celery just before 
earthing up gave results incomparably better than that portion not 
so treated, though all were grown in very rich soil. On the con¬ 
tinent it has been found to be especially suited to Buckwheat. 
Applied to Mangolds it has been found equal, but not perceptibly 
superior, to common salt. Your correspondent quotes Ville ap¬ 
parently with the view of discrediting him—a thing hardly neces¬ 
sary, for most of the propositions advanced by that chemist have 
been found to be not well founded. “ B.” could scarcely have 
damaged the authority on which he seems to rely more effectively 
than by quoting the unfortunate words Ville used to make farmers 
believe that all they had to do to keep the Potato disease at bay 
was to use plenty of potash. Surely all the world knows now that 
that is unmitigated nonsense. 
“ B.” tells us that the liberal application of chloride of potash 
to Vines is in France attended with the very best results, and 
thinks this disproves the quotation from the New York pamphlet. 
It by no means follows. Manures as applied to Potatoes are placed 
where the roots at once find them, and at a season when, owing to 
the dryness of the soil, they are not so fully distributed through 
the soil as may be necessary to secure the change which takes 
place in salts when distributed through the soil. Potash by the 
New York authority is shown to be necessary for the formation of 
starch (and, of course, sugar), and chemists have shown that when 
chloride of potash is applied to soil and water passed through it 
the salt gives up its acid, which is washed out of the soil, the base 
alone remaining. From this it will be seen that the effects pro¬ 
duced by a manure may vary very greatly, according as they may 
be applied, the season, or the rainfall. Should a soaking flood 
occur after the manure is applied in time to wash away the chlo¬ 
rine—the soil retaining the potash—the effect might be very dif¬ 
ferent from what would occur were showers only sufficient to fairly 
moisten the soil to occur. 
“ B.” thinks that my belief that plants themselves possess diges¬ 
tive powers tells greatly against what I wrote in my original 
article on fertilisers. If he will kindly refer to that article he will 
see that, though I recommended the sprinkling of manure heaps, 
and said that thereby the potash would be rendered soluble, a 
main object was to secure the retention of the ammonia that might 
otherwise be lost. 
This question of solubility is rather a vexed and unsettled one. 
My studies have led me to this conclusion—that when solubility 
can be secured for nothing, or for a small outlay, it is well to 
secure it; when the process is likely to cost much it is not gene¬ 
rally worth the outlay, because the soil very speedily causes soluble 
salt (potash salt, ammonia salt, phosphate, See.) to become insoluble. 
They are, in fact, precipitated. On the other hand, well pul¬ 
verised, properly distributed manures are very nearly as available 
as the others. In practice soluble phosphates have been found to 
give material assistance to the young plant, but those finely 
pulverised were equal to plants the roots of which had possession 
of the soil. As an agriculturist, then, I would hesitate before 
spending money merely to secure solubility, believing that the 
money would be spent to better purpose on a larger amount of 
fertilisers. Of course, were it thought desirable to have the full 
benefit returned by the first crop, or were the soil so poor that 
manure immediately available was necessary, or were artificials 
alone used, or it were the last year of the lease, my action might 
be different; but these are only exceptions to a general rule. 
“ B.” asks if I ignore the action of acids and salts in rendering 
such matters as tribasic phosphate soluble. By no means, but I 
doubt if either are so plentiful in an ordinary well-drained soil as 
to produce all the effect ordinarily attributed to them. Solutions 
of common salt will render tribasic phosphate soluble, and it is 
supposed that the carbonic acid constantly produced by decaying 
organic matter is constantly dissolving out the otherwise unavail¬ 
able mineral matter. It is in this way we believe that common 
salt fertilises soil. Chemists are coming to the conclusion that 
soda is not a necessary plant food. Still it often causes an in¬ 
crease of growth ; not when first applied. True manures act in 
that way. Common salt, on the contrary, rather inclines to check 
growth, especially when applied in large quantities. It is, in 
fact, used for destroying vegetation, and this it effects. By-and- 
by heavy rains wash it clean away, and then the suppressed vege¬ 
tation springs up with greater vigour than before. Some have 
thought that this proves salt to be a true plant food. The fact is, 
it acts as a solvent and sets free otherwise unavailable supplies. 
Applied to a piece of land, the land seizes the soda, setting the 
hydrochloric acid free. So long as this remains present in quan¬ 
tities sufficient to be noxious no growth takes place, but the acid 
meanwhile prepares food to be utilised when the first flooding 
rain shall have washed the acid away. Only on such a hypothesis 
can we explain how the weeds come up so much more strongly in 
walks some months after they have been salted, even in places so 
near the sea as “ B.’s ” place, where the rain is so charged with 
