212 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ September 6, 1883 
ing, Miss Lily Large, Magician, John Salter, Fanny Sturt, Oracle, John 
Forbes, Flora Wyatt, Maid of Athens, Mrs. Saunders, Parrot, and Lady 
Paxton. 
AMATEURS’ CLASSES. 
Shore Varieties. —As in the preceding section three classes were devoted 
to these, but for smaller numbers—viz., twenty-four, twelve, and six. The 
premier collection of twenty-four was that from Mr. H. Glasscock, Eye 
.Street, Bishop’s Stortford, even, handsome, highly coloured blooms, of 
moderate size, but extremely symmetrical. The varieties were Prince 
.Bismarck, Emily Edwards, Black Knight, Joseph Ashby, W. Rawlings, Hon. 
Mrs. P. Wyndham, Mrs. Spofforth, Earl of Ravensworth, Cardinal, Goldfinder, 
James Cocker, Modesty, Alexander Cramond, William Laird, Revival, 
Countess of Ravensworth, Harry, Mrs. Harry, Shirley Hibberd, Harrison 
Weir, Mary Nisbet, Ethel Britten, Rev. Dr. Moffat,* and Georgiana. Mr. J. 
Nation, Whitemore, Staplegrove, Taunton, was a close second with many 
■fine blooms. Mr. R. Petfield. Diddington, Buckden, Huntingdon, was third, 
•and .Mr. W. Butterworth, Green Hill, Kidderminster, was fourth, all with 
•creditable collections, but slightly wanting in refinement, though the weak 
■or rough blooms were by no means numerous. The competition was very 
keen in the class for twelve blooms, no less than a dozen stands being 
•entered. Mr. J. West, gardener to W. Keith, Esq., Cornwalls, Brentwood, 
took the lead with fresh and brightly coloured blooms, representing a good 
selection of the leading varieties. Mr. B. Clarke, Shottisham, All Saints, 
Norfolk, was adjudged secondary honours ; and Mr. J. Tranter, Upper 
Assenden, third, with good blooms, Ethel Britten being especially noteworthy. 
The winning stands of six blooms were contributed by Mr. G. Boothroyd, 
Woodville Hill; Mr. F. Masters, Penender Heath, Maidstone; Mr. J. E. 
Shrimpton, Englefield, Reading; and E. Mawley, Esq., Lucknow House, 
Addiscombe, Croydon, all of whom had praiseworthy examples. 
Fancy Varieties. —The two classes devoted to Fancy varieties were well 
filled. Premier honours were adjudged to Mr. Glasscock for twelve fine 
blooms, which comprised the following varieties :—Viceroy, John Forbes, 
McIntosh, H. Glasscock, Fanny Sturt, Edward Pick, George Barnes, Egyptian 
Prince, Mrs. Browning, Barnaby Rudge, Mrs. Hall, and Professor Fawcett. 
Mr. Nation was second with large and effective blooms of good varieties, and 
Mr. R. Petfield third. Eleven collections of six blooms were staged, the 
prizes being secured by the following exhibitors in the order named°:—First 
Mr. West, gardener to W. Keith, Esq., Cornwallis, Brentwood; second Mr. 
J. Tunbridge, gardener to W. Bott, Esq., Bloomfield, Chelmsford, 'ssox ; 
third Mr. Boothroyde, Woodville Hall, Dover; and fourth Mr. J. ,, ^ • 
Oomwell House, Mortlake. 
OPEN CLASSES. 
Two prizes of £1 were offered for the best Show and Fancy blooms 
•selected from the entire Exhibition—a task of considerable difficulty where 
so many were good. After a long and careful search the Judges decided 
'upon a bloom of Georgiana in Mr. C. Turner’s first-prize stand of forty-eight 
as the premier Show bloom—an honour which its merits well entitled it to, 
as in freshness, purity of colour, and substance it was all that could be 
•desired. The premier Fancy bloom was found in Messrs. Rawlings Bros’, 
•second-prize stand of twelve Fancies, a beautiful bloom of a sport from 
■George Barnes, pale purple ground with crimson streaks, very even, full, and 
•deep. 
Pompon Varieties.—The competition in the classes for Pompon Dahlias 
was excellent, and these beautiful and symmetrical flowers were deservedly 
•admired. Apart from the excellence of the varieties in this section, the com¬ 
pact growth and extremely floriferous nature of the plants render them 
admirably adapted for garden decoration, and they are yearly growing in 
public esteem. In the class for twenty-four varieties, shown in "bunches of 
•not less than ten trusses, Mr. Turner won premier honours with a grand 
collection, the bunches of blooms with buds being most effectively staged 
The varieties were Wilhelm Nitche, Little Duchess, Titania, Grass au Wien’ 
North Light, Favourite, White Aster, Comtesse Von Sternberg, Adonis, Gem’ 
•Cupid, Professor Bergeat, Mabel, Lady Blanche, Prince of Liliputians, Mdlle! 
de Facoret, Garnet, Nymphe. Isabel, Fair Helen, The Khedive, Little Arthur, 
.E. F. Jungter, and Hedwig Polwicz. Messrs. Keynes & Son, Salisbury, were 
•second with extremely neat blooms, more thinly, and consequently less effec¬ 
tively, staged than the preceding. Particularly attractive were Rosetta, 
Isabel, Darkness, Nemesis, Pure Love, Sappho, and a bright yellow seedling. 
Messrs. Cannell & Sons, Swanley, were a very close third with an imposing 
stand, but some of the blooms were, perhaps, fully too large, notably the 
•variety Conquest, but the majority were very fine indeed—Coquette, Lydia, 
Little Nigger, Model, Geoffrey de St. Hilaire, Lady Bird, Venus, Infancy, 
rand Meteor, as differing from those in the other stands, all being eminently 
•worth growing. Five collections were staged. 
In the class for twelve varieties six excellent collections were staged. 
Messrs. Paul & Sons, Cheshunt, secured premier honours with a charming 
•stand of flowers, Butterfly, A. Hubner, Little Mabel, Little Nigger, Pure 
Love, White Aster, Fanny Weimar, Dr. Webb, Dora, Nemesis, Dord, and 
Forstmeister Gschwina, were the winning varieties. Messrs. James Gilbert 
and Sons, St. Margaret’s Nurseries, Ipswich, were second with excellent 
blooms, but the stand had not quite such a smart appearance as the other. 
Fair Helen, and H. Milesky are noteworthy additions to the previously 
named varieties. Mr. Henshaw, Harpenden, St. Albans, was an exceedingly 
•close third with a rather crowded stand, but the majority of the blooms were 
of undeniable merit. Sensation, quilled, sulphur; Princess Sophia rosy 
•crimson ; and Guiding Star, white, were the best, dissimilar from those pre¬ 
viously named, in this good stand. The open class for six varieties, distinct 
was disappointing. We only observed two stands—namely, from Mr. West’ 
gardener to W. Keith, Esq., Cornwallis, Brentwood, and Mr. Tunbridge’ 
gardener to W. Bott, Esq., Bloomfield, Chelmsford, who were awarded the 
.prizes in the order named. 
■Single Varieties. The display of single varieties was considerable, 
•and the effect of the stands gorgeous. In Class 2, for twelve bunches Mr. 
Turner surpassed all rivals in arranging the finest stand that has ever been 
exhibited of these flowers, and secured the first prize for grand bunches of 
Alba, Mauve Queen, Rob Roy, Yellow Gem, Firefly, Beatrice Paragon 
Beauty of Cambridge, Duke of Teck, Purity, and Gracilis elegans. Messrs! 
Keynes of Salisbury followed closely with splendid bunches, beautiful 
amongst which were Picturata, Althea, Red Gauntlet, Acquisition, Evening 
Scar, Bertha, White Queen, Yellow Queen, and Defiance. Messrs. Paul and 
Son, Cheshunt, secured the third prize ; Harlequin, White Queen, May, 
Broxbourne Beauty, Helen, and Beauty of Cambridge being particularly 
attractive; Messrs. Cannell & Son following with a crowded stand of 
massive bunches of very large and brilliant flowers. 
Eight stands of six varieties were placed in competition, Mr. G. Humphries, 
nurseryman, Knighton Langley, Chippenham, securing the first position with 
remarkably fine bunches of Golden Star, Beautiful, Gracilis Perfecta, Beauty, 
rose-yellow centre ; White Queen, and Pictus, crimson, with a yellow ring. 
Messrs. Gilbert & Son, Norwich, were second, Mr. Walker, Thame, Oxford, 
third, and Messrs. Cheal & Sons, Cranley, fourth, all with good stands ; but 
one of the best, if not the very best, stand in this class was disqualified. It 
was from Messrs. R. Veitch & Sons, Exeter, and contained Daisy, one of the 
best whites in cultivation, and other superior varieties admirably staged; 
but one or two of the flowers of the striped variety Pantaloon having made 
an attempt to produce two rows of florets, was such a pantaloonish freak that 
the Judges could not overlook. Exhibitors of single Dahlias may take the 
hint and not allow their flowers to commit such pranks—at least if they do 
they must be punished by not being allowed to appear on the stage. Still, 
Pantaloon is a single Dahlia, and the stand was worthy of a better fate. 
Certificates were awarded for the following varieties of Dahlias and 
Gladiolus :— 
Dahlia Duchess of Connaught (Turner).—A handsome Fancy variety, the 
blooms of great size and substance, buff ground streaked with rich crimson. 
Dahlia Mrs. Hurst (J. Hurst, Enfield, Middlesex).—An extremely pretty 
Show variety, the blooms of moderate size, but most symmetrical and of a 
delicate blush tint. 
Dahlia Mrs. Bowman (Saltmarsh).—One of the single varieties, remark¬ 
able for the breadth of the rounded florets, the general outline of the flower 
very even. The colour is a rich shade of crimson-purple, very distinct and 
pleasing. A charming variety. 
Gladiolus Mr. Gladstone (Kelway).—Flowers large rich scarlet, white in 
the centre ; spike massive. 
Gladiolus Duke of Buccleuch (Kelway).—Bright salmon, light centre, 
fine flower and spike. Very handsome. 
Gladiolus Duchess of Teck (Kelway).—A charming variety ; flowers large, 
white with crimson streaks at the tips of the petals and in the lower petal. 
Gladiolus Sir Stafford Northcote (Kelway).—Flowers brilliant scarlet with 
a dash of purple in the lower petal. 
Gladiolus T. Moore (Kelway).—Yery dark scarlet, lower petal crimson. 
Yery distinct and effective. 
Of the miscellaneous exhibits, the single and Pompon Dahlias from 
Mr. T. S. Ware, Tottenham, were the most extensive and beautiful, some 
hundreds of very distinct and handsome varieties being represented, and 
well merited the extra prize awarded for them. The Gladiolus, though 
shown with the Dahlias, came under the cognizance of the Judges of the 
Fruit Show, and are referred to in that report. 
The Committee, Judges, principal exhibitors and friends, were entertained 
at luncheon in the afternoon, the usual toasts being proposed and responded 
to by Messrs. T. Moore, Shirley Hibberd, George Paul, R. Glasscock, J. Downie, 
and W. Dodds. The last-named replied for the Judges, as being the oldest 
present, stated that he first exhibited Dahlias in 1833, since which time they 
had been the objects of his constant attention. The opinion was general 
that the National Dahlia Show would become one of the firmly established 
horticultural institutions, and would be welcomed by the public with increasing 
favour every year. 
ON FAIRY RINGS. 
[A paper read by Mr. ‘Worthington G. Smith before the Essex Field Club.] 
Every person who has walked in the summer over grassy hills and 
through fields and woods must have noticed fairy rings. Sometimes they 
present themselves as circles and curves of bare ground, at other times 
the barren circle of ground has a rim of luxuriant grass outside; in 
some instances this circle or curve of dark rank grass has a third circle 
of Fungi beyond its outer line. In a perfect fairy circle we have, 
then, starting from the centre, a ring of barren ground, a ring of rank 
grass, and a ring of Fungi. In some instances a fairy circle of Fungi 
is only to be seen. Circles, curves, and quadrangles of rank grass of 
Fungi are sometimes seen that are not fairy rings, and it will, perhaps, 
be better to mention and dismiss these spurious rings and other geome¬ 
trical forms at once. For instance, anyone who has walked in open 
spaces in plantations must have frequently observed a ring of Fungi en¬ 
circling a tree, at a line on the ground indicated by the spread of the 
branches above. These growths are especially common in Fir planta¬ 
tions. Something drips from the tree, some resinous or other substance 
that favours the growth of certain Fungi, and they come up in an irregular 
ring at the drip of the tree where this substance has fallen. Such a ring 
is not a true fairy ring, and such a ring can never extend itself beyond 
the drip of the trees. Similar spurious rings and sometimes quadrangles 
may at times be seen around old hay and corn stacks, and even barns, at 
the place where moisture and decayed vegetable material has dripped 
from the overhanging edge. Such lines of rank grass and Fungi have 
nothing whatever to do with fairy rings. Sometimes an old horse may 
be tethered to a stake, and as he walks round and round his hoofs may 
wear away the grass and make a circle of barren ground ; but such a 
circle is not a fairy ring. In some places where moles disturb the ground, 
such disturbed ground is found occasionally to bear a crop of Fungi, but 
a crop of Fungi on a mole’s run, whether curved or no, is not a fairy ring. 
Fairy rings, then, are not caused by haycocks, tethered animals, the 
drippings of trees and barns, circular fertilising exhalations from the 
earth, or electricity. That they are not caused by haycocks is proved by 
the frequency of true fairy ring3 on lawns opposite to the drawing-room 
windows, where haycocks are not allowed to ornament the scene. If one 
walks on the edge of the cliffs on the south coast numerous true fairy 
