JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 7 
gained the chief prizes for twelve, six, and four Show varieties 
respectively. Other exhibitors in the classes for Zonal, Fancy, and 
Bronze varieties were Messrs. Reece, Davis, Beacham, Lambert, and 
Sholdice, who staged very fair examples of well-selected varieties. 
Gloxinias, Fuchsias, Calceolarias, and Begonias were numerous and 
good, many of the exhibits already mentioned taking prominent 
positions. 
Ferns were uncommonly healthy, both the exotic and hardy species 
and varieties. Messrs. Reece, Shrubb, Bristow, Lambert, and Chappell 
received the chief awards for neat collections. Fine-foliaged plants 
were also well represented, classes being devoted to Caladiums, 
Palms, and Begonias. Messrs. Beck and Lambert exhibited very suc¬ 
cessfully, Messrs. Bristow, Shrubb, and Martin also taking substantial 
honours. 
Fruits and vegetables were fairly numerous, and indicated excellent 
culture. Grapes were especially noteworthy for their good finish, 
Messrs. Beck, Wright, Buckman, and Bristow staging the best ex¬ 
amples and gaining the chief prizes. Mr. Jeffery and Mr. Rainbird 
were the two of the best exhibitors of vegetables. 
In the vegetable and fruit tent Messrs. J. Laing & Co., Forest 
Hill, had a large and elegant group of plants, including numerous 
specimens of three fine Tuberous Begonias flowering very freely. 
HERBACEOUS PLANTS. 
I quite agree with “Wyld Savage” in some of his state¬ 
ments on fashion in gardening. Where there is a large place there 
portions may be kept severely for each style, but I do not any 
more see why we of the middle class are for ever to be aping those 
above us. If “my lord” has gone in for ribbon, carpet, and 
mosaic bedding, there is no valid reason why the parson and the 
doctor are to follow suit; and if “Sir John” chooses to have 
an herbaceous garden, and to keep stately plants of that charac¬ 
ter, that in no way debars me from having half-hardy things in 
my mixed borders, and to seek for enlivenment in Pelargoniums, 
Calceolarias, and showy annuals. But I do not understand how, 
after his enormous outlay, “Wyld Savage” can only enume¬ 
rate those few plants. Why, I am looking on a clump of Papaver 
orientale you might see half a mile off; then I have a group of 
Cypripedium spectabile, worth all the bedding plants that could 
fill my garden. Where are his double purple and single Rockets ? 
Has he no Lilies of the davuricum and pomponium type, no Del¬ 
phiniums with their stately spikes, no rich floriferous double and 
single Pyrethrums, no Campanulas or Fraxinellas, no Anthericums 
or Veronicas ? And so I might go on naming a host of plants. 
“ Wyld Savage ” complains of not knowing what to buy. I 
can only say I have seen very reliable lists in the Journal during 
the present year. 
I do not think that up to the end of June a border purely of 
herbaceous plants ought to be dull. It will not, and never can be, 
glaring ; but bright it may be, and assuredly ought to be, and 
“ Wyld Savage ” is to be commiserated if he has had his 
terraces so dull as not to please “madame.” He does not do 
things by halves, and I am sorry to find that, as with his Roses so 
with his herbaceous plants, he has to write vanity and vexation 
of spirit.— Viola.. 
IRISES.—No. 10. 
In the same section with and closely allied to the species last 
described are the two now referred, both of which merit a place 
among the hardy plant collectors’ proteges. They are old garden 
plants, and were known to such writers as Parkinson, Gerarde, 
Lobel, and others of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and 
consequently take rank among what may be termed the historical 
species. 
The one represented in the annexed engraving (fig. 2) is Iris 
graminea, the grass-like Fleur de Lis, so named from the character 
of its foliage, which is long and narrow. The plant is not quite 
so attractive as many of its relatives, and yet there is a pleasing 
neatness in the form and coloration of the flowers that render it 
worthy of consideration. In Miller’s “Gardeners’ Dictionary” 
is a clear and lucid description of the species, which was as 
follows :—“ This has narrow, flat, grass-like leaves about a foot 
long, of a light green colour ; between these arise the stalk about 
6 inches high, having two narrow leaves much longer than the 
stalk. Flowers two or three, small; the petals (standards) have a 
broad yellow line with purple stripes ; the three falls are of a light 
purple colour striped with blue, and have a convex ridge running 
along them ; the others are of a reddish purple variegated with 
violet ; they have a scent like fresh Plums.” This description 
very truthfully represents the plant, except that it does not 
remark the beautiful veins and streaks on the falls, which con¬ 
stitute the chief attraction of the flower. Gerarde grew the plant 
in his garden, and published a figure and description of it in the 
“ Herball,” under the name of Chamaeiris tenuifolia, and he states 
that “ the floures are in shape and colour like those of the stink¬ 
ing Gladdon but much lesse.” It is extensively distributed over 
the central and southern portions of Europe, and thrives in almost 
any soil and situation provided it be not too dry. 
Iris siberica is a near ally of the above, and like it was well 
known to the old writers. This is also grown commonly at the 
present time, few gardens possessing a collection of Irises with 
any pretensions to completeness being without it or some of its 
Fig. 2.— Iris graminea. 
varieties. The typical form, which is well figured in the first 
volume of the “ Botanical Magazine,” is extremely pretty, the 
flowers being of moderate size, compact, with erect purple narrow 
standards, and rounded falls of a white ground colour delicately 
veined with blue. In subsequent volumes of the same work two 
varieties have been represented, one with white flowers, the other, 
named Sanguinea, a very distinct variety with large rich purplish 
blue flowers and reddish foliage. It appears in “ Parkinson’s 
Paradisus ” of 1629 as “ Iris angustifolius major caarulea, the 
greater blew flower de luce, with narrow leaues,” and bears, as the 
author says, “diuers flowers successively flowering one after 
another, and one like unto the flowers of the bulbous flower de 
luces, but of a light blew colour.” 
About a dozen named varieties of Iris siberica are now in com¬ 
merce, some departing considerably from the type in their flowers, 
