January 11, 1883. ] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 29 
cure next season he will not suffer from this troublesome pest. I 
may add that I have not seen any trace of it for over three years. 
—Thos. Weaves. 
NOTES ON CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 
I NOTICE that Mr. Moorman says the blooms are grown larger 
and of greater substance and solidity than formerly—that is to 
say, the growers of to-day grow better blooms than those of some 
years ago. I am not prepared to dispute this, it may be so ; but 
we ought to take into consideration the fact that we have now 
better material to work with. Every year adds some new sport 
or variety to the incurved sorts, and what would our exhibitions be 
without the Japanese, which were not in the country a quarter of 
a century ago ? It is nearly twenty-five years ago since Golden 
Queen of England was sent out, and I well remember being at the 
exhibition when prizes were offered for it for the first time, and 
those blooms with others exhibited with it are still vividly im¬ 
pressed on my mind. I am not sure if I have seen better since of 
the same varieties ; but many varieties introduced since that time 
are far superior in quality. Mrs. Bundle had not been raised, nor 
Empress of India, and Princess of Teck is a more recent intro¬ 
duction still. Mr. Burbidge alludes to the old Crimson Velvet. 
This is by no means an old variety. I bought it from Mr. Salter 
the first year it was sent out; perhaps it was twelve or fifteen 
years ago. It is quite distinct from King of Crimsons, which is 
evidently an older variety. I may be wrong, but I believe Tri- 
omphe du Nord and Julie Lagravi^re were both in cultivation 
before Mr. Fortune sent the Japanese varieties over to Mr. John 
Standish ; and King of Crimsons is not a Japanese, nor has it 
been certificated as one. The best of the reflexed blooms is Mr. 
Sharpe, a purplish crimson sort that Mr. Forsyth, late of Stoke 
Newington, used to exhibit well as a specimen. The specimen 
plants we have seen exhibited in recent years are not, I think, 
superior to what we have seen some years ago. The large speci¬ 
men from Mr. Bryant’s garden, of which a very good illustration 
was given in the Journal, was certainly a very wonderful produc¬ 
tion as regards size ; but I fancy if that and the others exhibited 
at Kingston had been put into competition with the six that 
gained the first prize at that Show the large specimens must have 
been in the second place only. I think it right to say this in 
justice to the grower of the six premier plants at the Show.— 
J. Douglas. 
[We did not engrave the plant in question as the best in the 
Show, but because it was the only good specimen of which a 
photograph was placed at our disposal.] 
FRUIT-GROWING ON CHALK SOILS. 
In these days of economy it may be doubted if many will be 
induced to follow the proposal of “ Et Ca3tera ” (page 525, last 
volume) in making borders for fruit trees of imported loam and with 
concreted bottoms, and neither is it at all necessary. Thin soils on 
chalk are no worse for fruit-growing than are thin soils on many 
other bad subsoils. A rusty, impenetrable, iron-bound, or a cold 
cankering clay is as bad, and, in some respects, even worse than 
chalk, yet good fruit is produced on both without the great expense 
advised. Fifty or a hundred years ago, before the advantages of 
root-lifting and pruning were understood, and when large trees, 
such as were considered indispensable a few years ago, it was the 
custom, and a necessary one too, to clear out subsoils, concrete the 
bottoms, and fill up with costly imported loam. In these days 
agriculture was at its best, now it is at its worst. Then labour 
was very cheap, now it is dear. Then gardeners looked upon such 
preparations as absolutely necessary, now we can grow healthy 
trees even on bad soils without such preparation. 
The writer of this has had no experience of chalk, but some on 
thin soils, in one instance with a very cold unhealthy clay subsoil 
that was poison to the trees when the roots entered it, and also on 
a very rusty subsoil that was even worse, and yet managed to grow 
trees in the best health. 
Your correspondent proposes an expensive method of—What ? It 
is well to clearly understand what. Well, it is neither more nor 
less than keeping the tree roots out of the subsoil, and making sure 
of their being always among the upper soil. That is all that i3 
necessary; but if the trees are periodically lifted, and any down¬ 
going roots laid near the surface, and a few inches of firm soil 
placed underneath, concreting will not be necessary. Indeed, 
concreting, plausible as it looks on paper, tends to produce an 
unhealthy soil in which no trees will long thrive unless very 
skilfully managed. More than one concreted border has been 
broken up because of the impossibility of keeping soil that is 
isolated from the subsoil in sweet condition. 
The concreting might be overcome, but where is the necessary 
loam to come from P Is the garden to be deepened by rendering 
barren a portion of the park or farm ? Those who live in the centre 
of a chalk, clay, or sand district have either to bear the expense of 
carting loam miles or removing the surface of what is near, and so 
spoiling the land thus robbed, and not one owner in a hundred will 
listen to either proposal. The writer remembers a case when the 
loam was brought by the canal ten miles for a Vine border, and 
although nothing was paid for the loam, its carriage cost more than 
the vinery after everybody was paid! But how many could find 
loam even ten miles away, or indeed at all ? In the cases mentioned 
the estate on the clay and the other on the loam both belonged to 
the same owner, otherwise neither love nor money would have 
procured it. 
But, except in extreme cases, it is not necessary. By root- 
pruning and lifting the roots of trees can easily be kept among the 
surface soil. Under such circumstances trees of large size need not 
be looked for, but in the case of wall trees the returns need not be 
less. Nay, it ought to be more, for trees so started are always 
more fruitful than trees the roots of which live in a colder climate 
than those which are kept at the surface. And beyond that the 
finest fruit almost invariably comes from the lifted trees, simply 
because the roots being near the surface gather a sap that is warmer 
than deep-rooted trees can. Moreover, such can be fed better and 
better protected from drought by mulching, because one may be 
perfectly certain where the roots are. 
The subject deserves some consideration, but as we look at it 
all the advantages offered by such costly means as your correspon¬ 
dent proposes may be secured in most cases much more cheaply.— 
J. H. H. 
NEW PICOTEES. 
PiCOTEES of late years have not yielded many novelties, which 
must be owing to the older varieties being so fine that it is nearly 
impossible to surpass them. In red-edged Picotees I like Winifred 
Esther (Dodwell), a medium red edge, in style of Wm. Summers, 
which it very much resembles, but excels. Another variety, Elsie 
Grace, by the same raiser, has a fine petal—a light-edged red. No 
doubt it is a seedling from Mary. It wants shading, or else, like 
that variety, it flushes in the white. 
In purple Picotees I have seen three. Clara Penson (Willmer) 
is a light-edged purple in the style of Her Majesty, but certainly 
not so good as that variety, all the flowers of it grown both by 
Mr. Bower and myself being curled in the petal. This sort may 
do well enough in the south, but in my opinion it will never make 
a northern flower. Mrs. A. Chancellor (Turner), a very heavy 
purple, is a finely marked flower with plenty of petals. Another 
fine flower is Master Nichol (Schofield), a light-edged flower of the 
largest size, pure in the white, and a perfect wire edge. It is the 
best light-edged purple that I have seen with the broad petals of 
Mary, but more of them. 
In heavy-edged roses Lady Holmesdale (Schofield) is a splendid 
flower, and deservedly won premier at Wakefield Carnation and 
Picotee Show. It is a large flower, smooth on the edge, and free 
from spots or bars. I may say that there is no great stock of 
plants of the two latter varieties, as they were only 'partially 
distributed in 1881.—G. Rudd, JJnderdiffe, Bradford , 
THE PARSNIP. 
This year I had this crop in the vegetable garden proper—the 
Jersey and hollow-crowned varieties ; in my experimental vege¬ 
table garden principally the Maltese, and in our attached farm 
a considerable piece of The Student Parsnip. As I think this 
vegetable is not as much grown as its merits deserve I propose to 
give a few notes on its culture for culinary purposes generally, on 
the varieties, and the diseases to which 1 noticed them liable. 
One of my oldest recollections is a discussion of the relative 
merits of the Parsnip as a substitute for the Potato in Ireland as 
a general article of diet. Like the Artichoke for such a purpose, 
its merits were then over-estimated by its advocates and depreciated 
by others. But its culture in both countries—and I have per* 
sonally noted the fact—is much less than it should be. It is not 
so palatable as the Potato as an article of general diet during the 
winter and spring months, when it should be more generally used. 
But one of the reasons is that its cooking is very imperfectly un¬ 
derstood. I should mention, too, that it is a mistake to remove 
this vegetable from the soil until required ; it becomes more tender 
with age. But then its tendency to certain diseases, to be imme¬ 
diately referred to, must be kept at the same time in mind. 
During the past month we had here 10° of frost (22° Fahr.), and 
have just had 10 inches depth of snow. The Parsnip is one of the 
very few vegetables that will not suffer. But a supply should 
