Februar 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
Ill 
Hope, Abb6 Passaglia, Mrs. Cunningham, Faust, Beauty of Stoke, 
La Belle Blonde, George Peabody, Cassandra, Miss Thurza, Rev. 
J. Dix, Hereward, Golden G. Glenny, Lady St. Clare, Albert 
Smith, Rifleman, Donald Beaton, Rev. C. Boys, Boadicea, Princess 
Louise of Hesse, Princess Alexandra, Nonpareil, Her Majesty, 
Model, Mr. James, Dr. Rozas, Laurinda, Plenipo, Mr. H. Morgan, 
Lady Carey, Caractacus, Mrs. Sharp, Marchioness of Lome, and 
Marechal Duroc. 
In the third list of twenty-four varieties most of the foregoing 
were named, and in addition the undermentioned varieties were 
included in a few of the return®, but none obtained more than 
five votes :—Mr. J. Laing, L’Orient, Golden Dr. Brock, Miss Mard- 
chaux, Captivation, Ossian, Themis, Arihur Worthly, Vesta, Ion, 
Boule de Neige, Admiration, Hermione, Hetty Barker, Hackney 
Holmes, Lady Russell, Album Formosum, Little Pet, King of 
Denmark, Dr. Lindley, Exquisite, Cleopatra, Rotundiflorum, C. E. 
Waters, Lady Godiva, Princess Marie, Madame Fold, Duke of 
Roxburgh, Talbot, Cassandra, Duke of Edinburgh, Crimson Velvet, 
Mons. Bonamy, Candidissimum, Alma, Plutus, Countess of Gran¬ 
ville, Golden Ball, Little Harry, Formosum luteum, Mr. Jay, Mrs. 
Shaw, aud Aregina. 
Returning to the tabulated list giving the result of the election, 
we find that the following varieties secured the highest number 
of votes in the first twelve, as is indicated in the first column— 
viz., Princess of Wales, Empress of India, Golden Empress of 
India, Prince Alfred, Queen of England, Jardin des Plantes, Hero 
of Stoke Newington, Mrs. Heale, John Salter, Barbara, Refulgence, 
and Mr. Bunn. These are arranged according to the respective 
number of votes each obtained; and it will be noticed that the 
result is most satisfactory, for a stand of good blooms of the varie¬ 
ties named would, if well set up, be exceedingly difficult to sur¬ 
pass—in fact, we cannot see how the selection could be improved. 
There is a due proportion and diversity of colours, including two 
whites, three yellows, one amber, three dark varieties, two blush, 
and one rose. The premier varieties in the first twelve are Princess 
of Wales and Empress of India, each of which obtained sixty-five 
votes ; but the former is entitled to precedence owing to its 
securing seven second-class, while Empress of India had six in 
that class ; and though Prince Alfred heads the list in the total 
number of votes, yet it is fourth in the first twelve. Golden Em¬ 
press, though following the last-named variety in the general total, 
precedes it by three first-class votes. 
Taking the varieties which were accorded the greatest number 
of second-class votes, as shown in column 2 of the table, and 
excluding Barbara, Jardin des Plantes, Mr. Bunn, and Queen 
of England, which came into the first twelve, we have the follow¬ 
ing, which are also named in order of their votes—Princess 'Peek, 
White Venus, Lady Hardinge, Prince of Wales, Nil Desperandum, 
Venus, Cherub, Princess Beatrice, Lady Slade, Mrs. Dixon, Mr. 
G. Glenny, and Mrs. G. Rundle. These give the following colours 
—three whites, three yellows, two dark varieties, two rose, and 
two blush—also a good proportion. It will be seen that most 
of these varieties secured a good proportion of first-class votes, 
but not sufficient to oust the larger-floweied varieties which have 
obtained so marked a preference. 
To decide the best twenty-four we have selected those with the 
highest total number of first and second-class votes together after 
excluding those which have gained places in the two twelves. In 
that way the undermentioned varieties have taken the lead— 
Bronze Jardin des Plantes, White Globe, Novelty, Mr. Brunlees, 
White Beverley, Golden Queen of England, Eve, Isabella Bott, 
Mrs. Haliburton, Baron Beust, Golden Beverley, Empress Eugdnie, 
Lord Derby, Emily Dale, Beauty, Mr. Howe, Mrs. Shipman, Miss 
Mary Morgan, Guernsey Nugget, Lady Talfourd, Pink Venus, 
Beverley, Pink Perfection, and St. Patrick. Of course, if it were 
desired to select twenty-four varieties for exhibition they would 
be chiefly chosen from the first twenty-four, and those last named 
can only be considered as affording a surplus in case the others 
should be unsatisfactory, and the same remark applies to the 
first twenty-four ; for instance, if a stand of twelve were required 
the varieties could be selected from the leading sorts named in 
the two twelves, as more scope would thus be allowed. 
Amongst other notable peculiarities in the result table it is 
noteworthy that Mr. Howe and Golden Queen of England each 
obtained eleven first-class votes, which is the same number as 
Mrs. Dixon, though the latter gained a place in the second twelve 
by a majority of eighteen votes over Mr. Howe, and of twelve 
above Golden Queen. Mr. Bunn and Lady Hardinge secured pre¬ 
cisely the same total number of votes—viz., fifty-six, but strangely 
reversed, Mr. Bunn having thirty-one first and twenty-five 
second ; while Lady Hardinge had twenty-five first and thirty- 
one second. Mrs. Dixon and Cherub are also equal in total votes 
■—namely, thirty-two each, but the former has eleven first and 
twenty-one second, while the other has only eight first bu 
twenty-four second. Mr. G. Glenny and Princess Beatrice are 
similarly alike in the totals—twenty-nine each, the first leading 
by three first-class votes. Golden Queen of England, Eve, 
Isabella Bott, Mrs. Haliburton, and Baron Beust have all 
equal totals, Golden Queen surpassing them all by three first- 
class votes. Several other cases of equal totals occur, but they do 
not need special mention ; however, the comparatively high 
position which Lord Wolseley obtained as a new variety that was 
exhibited for the first time during the past year is remarkable, 
and Mr. Orchard, the fortunate raiser, states that if the variety 
were in commerce he would give it a place in the first twelve. It 
is strange that, taking the proportion of first to second class 
votes, the sport should have a higher place than its parent Prince 
Alfred. 
As previously stated, not one of the seventy-seven returns that 
we have tabulated included the whole of the varieties that have 
obtained places in the first twelve, and one only comprised eleven 
of them, which was sent in by Mr. George Burden, Lingdal 
Lodge, Oxton, Bkkenhead, who is therefore entitled to the premier 
position as an elector. Twelve returns included ten of the first- 
class varieties, and were from the following :—Messrs. W. Bardney, 
Norris Green, Liverpool; John Bradner, Arley Hill Nursery, 
Bristol ; N. Davis, GO, Warner Road, Camberwell ; S. Dixon k Co., 
Hackney ; J. Foster, Greenbank, Wavertree, Liverpool ; G. 
Harding, Bristol House, Putney Heath ; C. Herrin, Chalfont 
Park, Slough ; H. Langford, Coleraine House, Stamford Hill ; 
G. Mease, St. MichaePs Mount, Liverpool; W. Mease, Wyncote, 
Liverpool ; G. Stevens, St. John’s Nursery, Putney ; and W. 
Tunnington, Calderstone, Liverpool. 
Eighteen named nine varieties :—Messrs. John Baylis, Winter- 
boun e, near Bristol ; Beckett, Sandown House, Esher ; E. Cherry, 
Norfolk House, Streatham ; E. S. Cole, Woodside, Sneyd Park, 
Bristol; A. R. Cox. Elm Hall, Wavertree, Liverpool ; Draper, 
2, Primrose Hill, Northampton ; C. Gibson, Morden Park, near 
Mitcham ; S. Gilbey, The Cazenoves, Upper Clapton ; G. Langdon, 
Brooke House, Clapton ; Thomas Lead better, Bromborough Hall, 
Cheshire ; S. Mahood & Son, Windsor Nurseries, Putney ; E. 
Molyneux, Svvanmore Park, Bishops Waltham ; Monk, Leyton- 
stone, Essex ; J. W. Moorman, Coombe Bank, Kingston-on-Thames ; 
C. Orchard, Coombe Leigh, Kingston-on-Thames ; G. Stacey, 
York Street, Harborne, Birmingham ; John Strong, Thames Street, 
Weybridge, Surrey ; and W. Todd, Dingle Bank, Aigburth, 
Liverpool. 
Eleven returns included eight of the first-class varieties—viz., 
the following Messrs. E. Berry, Roehampton, Surrey ; W. Burns, 
Wykham Lodge, Horsham, Surrey ; Cochrane, Finsbury Park, N. ; 
James Garaway & Co.. Bristol; Thos. Hobb=, Lower Easton, 
Bristol ; A. Holmes, Hawthorns, Clapham Park; J. Holmes, 
Nightingale Lane, Clapham ; Lansdell, Barkby Hall, Leicester ; 
J. Lyne, Belvedere, Wimbledon; Pope, Northbrook House, 
Southampton; and C. J. Salter, Selborne, Streatham. 
The remaining electors named less than eight first-class varieties, 
but they with those previously mentioned are equally entitled to 
our best thanks for the cordial and ready manner in which they 
have given us their assistance. 
EASTER BEURRE PEARS. 
I think there are few subjects connected with the cultivation 
of fruits harder to understand than the variation of Pears in size, 
flavour, and keeping qualities in different soils and situations. 
About ten years ago 1 took charge of a garden on the Bagshot 
sand formation. One of my first occupations was to plant a 
selection of fruit trees, including Pears, and many have been my 
disappointments as old favourites have proved quite useless, 
although the same varieties had done me good service on other 
soils. It would occupy too much of your space to relate all my 
failures. I will only say, that having a vivid recollection of 
sending a grand lot of Easter Beurre for dessert in February from 
a tree that grew on a south wall in the neighbourhood of Don¬ 
caster, I concluded that trees would do well as pyramids on a 
warm soil so much further south, and so planted s : x trees of that 
variety. They have borne a few fruits each year, but they 
were very small, very much cracked, and quite devoid of flavour 
until the last season, when they grew to a moderate size, did not 
crack, and the flavour was all that could be desired. 
I planted one tree of the same variety on a wall with a south¬ 
west aspect that has given us much finer fruit, but the flavour has 
never been g*od. Last year it bore a good crop, the fruits of 
average size, about 8 ozs. We are using them at the present time, 
but they are very mealy, not to be compared with those grown 
on the pyramids which were about half the size, and, strange to 
