338 JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. L April 26 , isss. 
after carefully examining it we can only consider it to be a supe¬ 
rior form of the Scottish Bird’s-eye Primrose, which is found in 
pastures in Orkney, Caithness, and Sutherland. It was first dis¬ 
covered by Mr. Gibb of Inverness at Holborn Head, but it has 
since been found in several districts, and has also been observed 
in arctic Lapland, Norway, and Sweden. The typical form is of 
moderate size with neat purplish flowers, but in the specimen en¬ 
graved the whole plant is much more vigorous, the flowers larger 
and of a richer crimson-purple hue, these alterations being doubt¬ 
lessly due to cultivation, and show how worthy this Scottish 
wilding is of being cultivated in gardens. 
ROSES ON THEIR OWN ROOTS. 
I regket to find that no rosarian has written, in answer to 
Mr. W. Simons, to defend the system of growing Roses upon 
stocks, and in the hope that some authority will do so I venture 
to start the discussion. 
I mentioned last week that growing Roses upon their own roots 
was generally recommended by those who do not exhibit; the 
reasons of this being, first, that one who takes a pride in his 
Roses will generally try to propagate them himself, and he will 
find budding the cheapest, quickest, most interesting, and most 
effective mode of procedure; and, secondly, that one of Mr. 
W. Simons’ persuasion will perhaps say, “ Oh ! I grow quite as 
good Roses on their own roots as exhibitors do on their stocks 1 ” 
but till brought to the test of the show table, that is but a 
statement. Again, though there may be lovers of the Rose who 
make its culture a study and yet do not exhibit, it is not, I think, 
taking too much for granted to suppose that those who do gain 
prizes at Rose shows are best acquainted with the most successful 
way of growing them, and most qualified to speak of it. 
Mr. W. Simons, for instance, has the following in his letter : — 
“ If your plants die to the ground, as many of them will do in a 
rigorous winter or spring, there is no certainty, unless you expose 
the plant to the budded portion, whether the new shoots are 
Briars or bastards, the illegitimate offspring being in this case 
what you crave.” I cannot say to whom the word “ you ” in the 
above passage is intended to be applied, but it seems to me a little 
“ rough ” on those of your readers who flatter themselves that 
they can distinguish a Briar, or even a Manetti shoot from that of 
a Rose. 
I was surprised also at Mr. W. Simons’ lament that Roses on 
their own roots were not to be bought from our large nurserymen. 
Mr. Cranston of Hereford, who must be one of the nearest large 
professional growers to Merthyr Tydfil, has quite recently had a 
special advertisement of them in your own columns. And this 
leads me to agree with a reason Mr. W. Simons gives, and a very 
good one, why “stock-budded plants are in favour”—namely, 
that none but nurserymen in quite a large way, like Mr. Cranston, 
can afford the wood necessary for cuttings. From a thicket of 
maiden Manettis he might spare sufficient for a certain amount 
of certain sorts, but he must go to budded plants to get them. 
It seems to me that the advantages of budding Roses over 
growing them on their own roots are economy, certainty, earlier 
maturity, and (last, but not least) better blooms at all stages, in 
most cases. 
1, The fact that one bud will produce a Rose tree by budding, 
while something like half a dozen will be required for a cutting, 
as acknowledged by Mr. W. Simons, will show the economy of 
budding. 
2, Greater certainty in propagation is also acknowledged for 
budding. “In skilful hands less buds than cuttings fail.” 
3, As to earlier maturity, the cutting makes little growth and 
no flowers worthy the name the first year. Neither, it may be 
said, does the stock, which is planted to be budded on. We come, 
then, to the second summer. In that year most budded Roses are 
at their best ; some are only seen at their best at that stage. Can 
the same be said of cuttings ? I doubt it; though I do not wish 
to deny that a few, and some of them good Roses, do succeed 
eventually on their own roots. 
In five years’ time five Briars afoot or two high, planted against 
the south wall of my house (quite a large one for a country 
rectory) and afterwards budded with Marbchal Niel, Reve d’Or, 
Lamarque, Solfaterre, and Belle Lyonnaise, completely covered it 
to the roof. The soil is poor, and no manure was given till last 
year, by which time the wall was covered. Could this effect have 
been produced by cuttings ? And if it be admitted that the 
blooms of budded plants are better the year after budding than 
those of cuttings planted the same time as the stocks, the growing 
of cuttings in a large way would make much difference to nursery¬ 
men, who derive a large portion of their profits from the sale of 
the cut blooms of their maiden plants. 
4, Especially I would maintain also that the blooms of budded 
plants are, with a few exceptions, always better than those of 
cuttings, and that this is particularly the case with the choicest 
sorts. I may be shown a good growth, and perhaps a fair amount 
of bloom of Jules Margottin ; but I have a soul above Jules 
Margottin, and 1 ask, “ Where is your Horace Yernet ?” 
Mr. W. Simons says, “ My experience shows that there is 
scarcely a Rose which is not better grown under suitable con¬ 
ditions upon its own roots than upon a stock, and I know of no 
Rose which will not grow well from cuttings, and be longer-lived 
and more floriferous than Roses budded upon a stock however 
vigorous.” The question is, Will other rosarians allow this state¬ 
ment to pass unchallenged, or do they really endorse it 1. Will 
Marie Cointet and Xavier Olibo “ grow well from cuttings ?” 
That any Roses on cuttings are so floriferous as worked Roses is 
not my experience ; and, by the way, I may mention that I have 
noted in my rows of Roses of the same sort—a Briar and Manetti 
alternately, a marked difference in the amount of autumn bloom 
in favour of the Briar. I do not know much about other 
branches of horticulture, but when I find that Peaches, Plums, 
Apples, &c., and even Clematises and Cacti, are grown upon 
other stocks, I do not suppose they are so propagated for the fun 
of the thing or the interest of the operations, but because it is 
found to be suitable to the well-being and usefulness of the 
plant—the point in general being, that we obtain thereby earlier 
maturity and fruitfulness. I shall be very glad if my crude 
remarks have the effect of drawing some experienced rosarian 
to write upon this question, even if it be to contradict me.— 
A. F. M. 
ASPARAGUS CULTURE UNDER DIFFICULTIES. 
Planting time for new Asparagus beds has come round again, 
and it is not improbable that where failures have occurred some 
doubt may exist as to the best course to adopt to avoid them in 
future; some account of an instance of failure which proved a step¬ 
ping stone to success may, therefore, prove useful now. 
I may as well own at the outset that till some eight years ago I 
had never had any difficulty about Asparagus, always having been 
able to produce it abundantly without the adoption of special means, 
and had always regarded it as amenable to the most simple method of 
culture either forced or in the open garden. But then came my 
failure ; and although that I have now set matters right and have 
plenty of Asparagus, I must still acknowledge the correctness of 
my former conviction of the ease and simplicity of its culture 
generally, yet I am bound to own that there are exceptional cases 
requiring special care and a little extra labour—nothing more, in 
order to ensure success. • 
The primary cause of my failure was undoubtedly ignorance of 
the nature of the soil—a poor, thin, silicious one on the Ha*tings 
sand formation, and quite the reverse of what is known as a heavy 
soil in the common acceptation of the term. Yet I found sub¬ 
sequently that it would settle into a hard inert mass, quite as 
impervious to moisture as clay, and consequently in time it proved 
equally fatal to Asparagus roots. At first all went well enough. 
The soil was efficiently drained and enriched with farmyard manure, 
extra care being taken to mix it thoroughly with the soil. The 
Asparagus, planted in single rows 18 inches apart and a foot apart 
in the rows, grew freely, and for four years all went well; but then 
traces of debility and incipient decay became apparent, and upon 
examination it was found that as the manure beneath the plants had 
become absorbed by them, the soil had gradually settled down more 
and more closely about the roots, till drainage had come so slow that 
they had perished. 
Prompt measures were at once taken to form new beds in another 
part of the garden, where thorough mechanical division had mean¬ 
while been imparted to the soil by repeated heavy dressings of coal 
ashes as well as manure after every crop. I therefore had now a sound 
and reliable basis to work upon, and had only to turn to my muck 
heap for an abundant supply of the best compost in the world for 
Asparagus culture, which may roughly be stated to consist of two 
parts of garden refuse, one of dung, one of coal ashes, and about a 
half part of lime well mixed together. A layer of this 8 inches in 
thickness was spread over the entire surface and well worked into 
it, and it was then planted with fresh strong young seedling plants, 
which threw up stalks of such vigour in the first year as showed 
clearly how suitable the soil was for them. Especial care was taken 
to prevent the young growth being damaged by wind, supports 
being tied along each side of it. It should be added that 
frequent applications of sewage doubtless contributed materially to 
the robust dark green hue of the growth, and these waterings were 
given without hesitation from the fact of its being well known that 
the soil was now thoroughly porous and the drainage efficient. 
