376 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ Oatobsr 23, 1881 
TASTE IN FLOWER GARDENING. 
Notwithstanding your correspondent’s display of literary ability on 
page 355 in endeavouring to defend himself by the ingenious use of 
parallel paragraphs, I fail to see that he has disproved the truth of the 
statements contained in my previous article. I also fail to see in what 
way I have distorted his views. My object in criticising his previous 
article was to defend hardy plant culture from what I then and siill con¬ 
sider was an unjust comparison of their value with ordinary bedding 
plants for flower garden decoration. I have had ample experience of the 
hardy and ordinary bedding plant question, and I stilt contend that the 
greatest amount of pleasure and beauty is to be obtained where the prefer¬ 
ence is given to hardy plants forming the principal feature of flower garden 
decoration. Hardy plant culture is rapidly rising in popularity, and as 
gardeners become more educated in the beauty of form and colour, their 
adaptability to our climate, and their good qualities, the more their great 
merits will be appreciated. It is simply ignorance of the qualities of such 
efiective plants as Pentstemons, Snapdragons, Marguerites, &c., to include 
them under the term of “ wild gardening.” These plants are far too 
beautiful and effective to be classified as synonymous with roughness and 
untidiness. 
Your correspondent asks me to furnish him with names of places’where 
ordinary bedding plants are grown on a large scale, requiring from six to 
nine months’ preparation before bedding out. This I decline to do 
publicly, but I can furni>h the Editor with many examples, if necessary, 
of gardens where geometrical and carpet bedding is carried out on such a 
large scale as to require a great amount of glass and labour, which might 
be more profitably utilised if hardy plants were judiciously employed. 
With reference to the alleged discrepancy in the amount of time absorbed 
in the preparation of bedding plants, that is simply a clerical error which 
should have read “ nine,” and not “ six ” months, as printed. “ Sylvanus” 
says “ there is very much ihat is crude and misleading ” in my statements 
anent the preparation and housing of bedding iflants, but I fail to see 
what foundation he has for making this charge, as all gardeners who have 
to deal with the propagation and preparation of bedding plants know 
too well that immense quantities of Pelargoniums, Alternantberas, 
Iresines, &c , have to be stored in heat during the winter; and in sjDring, 
too, their propagation and growing-on requires the assistance of heat, as 
well as hardening off in frames, before they are finally planted out. For 
what purpose are these extraordinary efforts made ? For a three-months 
display in the flower garden. The real question, then, is. Are the results 
commensurate with the advantages ? My experience, and that of other 
hardy-plant advocates, is that they are not. 
I repeat again in substance what I had written in my previous article, 
that I have no wish to see the ordinary bedding plants dispensed with, but 
I contend that ordinary bedding plants are employed to a greater extent 
than their merits justify. Bedding plants employed judiciously in con¬ 
junction with hardy plants is what I advocate. Of what possible beauty 
or interest can the long monotonous ribbon borders be to persons of taste ? 
Surely such borders as ate occasionally seen filled with hundreds of 
Calceolarias, scarlet Pelargoniums, Pyrethrums, &c., would be rendered 
far more attractive if planted with a good selection of hardy plants. By 
judicious selection and planting a hardy plant border is full of interest 
during nearly the whole of the year. The mixed border is the most 
attractive way of growing hardy plants. In this you can plant attractive 
groups of bedding plants, such as the many varieties of Zonal Pelar¬ 
goniums, Ageratum, Iresines, and others, and a splendid effect can be 
obtained by a combination of the two materials. Hardy plant culture has 
not had a fair trial in consequence of their being relegated to most unsuitable 
positions in out-of-the-way corners, where they oft-times linger and die, 
and, indeed, are looked upon as “ rubbish.” If gardeners of the bedding-out 
school only tried hardy plant culture with the same amount of zeal and 
enthusiasm as they do for geometrical and carpet bedding flower gardening 
would be more attractive and beautiful than it now is. Assuming that 
many hardy plants require the support of stakes, as stated by your 
correspondent, the time required to attend to this trifling matter once a 
year—and it need not be done oftener if well done at the first—would not 
occupy so long as the pinching and pegging down of certain plants in 
carpet beds. 
As a proof of the correctness of my statements and of the gradual 
decline of the bedding rage, I may point to Hyde Park and Kew Gardens 
as examples where hardy plants are now being extensively employed for 
embellishment of beds and borders, instead of so much of the vulgar 
bedding formerly carried out therein. I quite admit the truth of 
“Sylvanus’s” assertion that if the proprietor of a garden wished his 
garden to be managed in a certain manner he has a perfect right to have 
it so, but instances are very rare indeed where owners of gardens p ssessing 
good taste raise an objection to the employment of hardy plants for 
decorating the borders of the flower garden. The credit of the revival 
of hardy plant culture is not due to gardeners, but to gentlemen cf 
culture and taste, who know how to appreciate the most beautiful in 
gardens. 
I am charged by your correspondent with possessing conventional 
ideas on flower gardening. I fail to see wherein the conventionality 
exists. I repeat again that the ordinary system of flower garden decora¬ 
tion needs considerable reform ere it bee mes satisfactory, as also does 
the formation of the flower garden itself. The rage for terraces, fountains, 
and statuary, regardless of their fitness and suitability for the situation 
in which they are employed, has happily had its day. There is too much 
similarity of style, especially in small gardens, which have the appearance 
of being turned out of one mould. We possess an immense wealth of 
hardy trees, shrubs, and flowers, and let us make a more rational use of 
them. We can only do so by closely studying Nature, and if we call in 
the assistance of art we shall do much towards producing an ideal garden. 
Can the intricate and formal blocks of beds, with walks of coloured 
gravel, which are often to be met with situated in the middle of an open 
lawn or adjacent to the windows of the mansion, filled in the summer 
with masses of gaudy colours and in winter bare, be called beautiful ? 
This vulgarity is often considerably aggravated by the absence of a back¬ 
ground of trees and shrubs, or a proportionate amount of greensward to 
tone down the glaring effect of the gaudy colouiing. These ideas are far 
from being conventional. 
“ Sylvanus ” finally says that the most naturally formed rockeries are 
highly artificial. I beg to differ from him again. The grandest sights in 
Nature are the rugged and naturally formed Alpine rocks. These have 
been formed by Nature alone, and she has provided their special vegetation 
for growing thereon. If we wish to cultivate these special rock plants 
we must provide a suitable home for them, and in providing that home 
we must accept Nature as our guide. If we do thus, we shall reproduce 
Nature, and thus add beauty to our gardens and avoid the formalism so 
conspicuously present where the strictly artificial features of statuary, 
fountains, and terraces exist or can be dispensed with. The situation 
should form the keynote to the arrangement, and were this rule followed 
we should see more of Nature and less of meaningless artificiality in the 
formation of flower gardens. Finally, gardens can be made beautiful 
and enjoyable without having to graze them with “ Highland cattle ” or 
“ Southdown sheep.”— Adam. 
CHRYSANTHEMUM AND FRUIT SHOWS, AUTUMN, 1881. 
As will be seen from the list appended, no less than thirty exhibitions 
are announced to be held during November this year, and these numbers 
afford conclusive proof of the rapidly extending popularity of the 
Chrysanthemum. As usual, the most important shows will probably be 
those at Kingston, the Royal Aquarium, Westminster, Birmingham, and 
Liverpool, valuable prizes and cups being offered at each. At Kingston 
the third champion challenge vase, value 25 guineas, will be offered 
for forty-eight blooms, twenty-four incurved and twenty-four Japanese. 
It is offered under the same conditions as the previous two—namely, 
that an exhibitor must win it twice, not necessarily consecutively, to claim 
it; but if it be won by three different exhibitors in the first three years the 
competition in the fourth will be confined to the winners. 
The National Chrysanthemum Society have a very strong and liberal 
schedule, the leading classes being those for the best group of Chrysan¬ 
themums, in which £8, £5, and £3 are offered, and for forty-eight 
Chrysanthemum blooms, twenty-four incurved and the same number of 
Japanese, not less than eighteen varieties of each, prizes being £15, £7, 
and £4. The first prize in this class is the largest amount offered at any 
show as one prize for Chrysanthemums, and may be expected to bring some 
powerful competitors. At this exhibition a number of valuable special 
prizes are also offered for vegetables. 
At Hull two very good classes are provided—namely, for forty-eight 
blooms, the prizes being £10, £7, £4, and £2, or a total of £23, thus 
ranking next to the leading class of the National Society in amount. For 
twenty-four blooms, £5, £2 10.9. £1, and 10^. are also offered, and these 
should bring a good display of fine flowers. 
The Liverpool Horticultural Association provide for a general show of 
cut flowers, stove and greenhouse plants, fruit and Chrysanthemum'’, a 
total of £180 being offered as prizes, including several of substantial 
value for the last-named plants and blooms. 
October 28th, 29th, andSOth.—Fruit Show'at South Kensington. 
November 6th.—Ealing. 
„ 6th and 7th.—Southampton. 
„ 7th and 8th.—Havant. 
„ 10th and 11th.—Stoke Newington. 
„ 11th.—Putney ; Royal Horticultural Society’s Meeting, South Kensington. 
„ 11th and 12th.—Kingston, Croydon, and Lambeth. 
,, 12th and 13th.—Royal Aquarium, Westminster ; Bath and Colchester. 
„ 13th.—Wa ton-on-Thames. 
„ 13th and 14th.—Richmond, Brixton, Teddington, and Tunbridge Wells. 
„ 14th.—Reading. 
„ 14th and 15th.—Crystal Palace, Huddersfield, Canterbury. 
„ 18th.—Winchester and Lincoln. 
,, 19th.—Wimbledon. 
„ 19th and 20th.—Northampton and Birmingham. 
„ 20th.—Taunton, Dubhn, and Aylesbury. 
„ 20th and 21st.—Hull. 
„ 22nd.—Loughborough. 
„ 26th.—Manchester. 
„ 25th and 26th.—Liverpool, Basingstoke. 
CACTUS AND OTHER DAHLIAS. 
In a recent issue I referred to tingle Dahlias, their comparative meiits 
and future prospects. A box of blooms of the above fiom Mr. Cannell 
seems to come as a gentle reminder that I had not referred to them. As 
they are increasing rapidly, and possess all the desirable staying or holding 
qualities I noted as deficient in singles, I will refer separately to some of 
those, together with newer introductions not, so far as I know, y'ct in 
commerce. 
Juarezii .—Among Cactus Dahlias I still think this peerless. The 
warm rich crimson colour is not its least commendation. 'Ihe blooms are 
produced in great profusion, and last at this time of the year per ect for at 
least two weeks. For the last two years I have not been able to flower it 
before October outdoors. Perhaps some reader would give me a hint bow 
to have it earlier. Mr. Cannell has now a purple shade of it. 
