December 4 , a«90.] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
483 
E VERY season’s experience reveals imperfections in schedules 
of prizes for products invited tor exhibition. The stipula¬ 
tions and conditions for the guidance of competitors and judges 
cannot be made too clear, and they should only be capable of one 
interpretation. At more than one Chrysanthemum show this year 
different views have been entertained in respect to what was or 
was not allowable under the schedule. This ought not to be. 
Committees of societies ought to have a clear conception of what 
they require exhibitors to do, and state this in terms which cannot 
be mistaken. It is not often that ambiguities arise in the cut bloom 
classes, nor with specimen plants ; but they are too common in 
connection with groups arranged for effect. The object of these 
is presumably to afford the best and most tasteful examples of 
the association of plants, so as to produce the most pleasing and 
satisfying results. In the first place, the object in view cannot be 
attained by ill-grown examples with leafless stems, sickly leaves, 
and inferior blooms, for it is not in the power of man to so hide 
the defects of such plants that the group in its entirety is 
meritorious. In most schedules there are some such words as 
these—“ Quality and effect to be the leading features in awarding 
the prizes.” Obviously they must ; but some, if not most, judges 
interpret the stipulation as meaning that quality of blooms is 
•regarded as of primary importance by the Committee, and conse¬ 
quently taste in arrangement has been practically ignored, the 
chief awards having been made to a flat surface of handsome 
blooms, as if hoisted on sticks in boldly obtrusive and not over¬ 
clean pots, sometimes stacked on each other. There is no display 
of taste whatever in such arrangements, yet because the word 
“ quality ” stands first in the committee’s instructions these con¬ 
glomerations of pots, sticks, and stems, with “exhibition blooms"’ 
from 4 to 7 or 8 feet above them, are placed before groups of 
infinitely greater decorative value, simply because the blooms, 
though good, would not “ count ” so well, though the foliage and 
general taste displayed in the formation of the groups may be 
distinctly superior. It is a question for committees to consider 
whether the dual features “ quality and effect ” are not more 
confusing than otherwise to both judges and exhibitors, and 
whether the simple formula “ the best and most effectively 
arranged group,” or the “ best group arranged for effect,” of what 
is required, would not be better for all concerned. A group 
cannot present a good effect if the plants bear inferior or stale 
blooms, nor can it if pots, stems, and stakes are as conspicuous as 
flowers. 
Competition in group classes has become so keen that perhaps 
more exhibitors than the public are aware of exercise considerable 
latitude in their arrangements. Some plants are taken out of their 
pots and some are laid on their sides, if thereby the general “ effect ” 
is enhanced. They know that the same methods are resorted to 
by the leading floral decorators in the embellishment of halls and 
mansions on festive occasions, and conclude they are justified in 
following the example. The consequence of this is that disquietude 
is caused and protests talked about if not formally lodged in time 
when prizes are adjudged to those groups. If it is the desire of 
authorities of shows that the plants of which groups are composed 
be shown in the pots in which they arc grown it is easy to say so, 
then if exhibitors transgress they do so at their peril ; otherwise 
“ custom ’’ is in their favour and may give to them the benefit of 
any doubt which exists in the absence of explicit stipulations. 
Another question now arises, and an important one in the 
judging of groups of plants arranged for effect. It cm scarcely 
be expected that the adjudicators can disarrange the groups to 
search for possible contraventions. If they did this there would 
be, and not unnaturally, such an outcry from exhibitors that would 
very soon put an end to that method of exhibiting ; while, without 
breaking into the groups on the first day, it is impossible that 
certain peculiarities can be discovered. This is particularly the 
case when plants have been cut down and their stems pressed in wet 
soil, or when flowers have been affixed where they never grew. 
That some exhibitors think it right to do such evidently wrong 
things is indisputable ; but except there is a spy in the camp who 
is cognisant of the circumstances and reveals them, prizes may be 
adjudged to those groups, because the blooms are as upright and the 
foliage as fresh at the moment of inspection as if they were grow¬ 
ing, but before the day is over, or the next day, the blooms hang 
down their heads as if ashamed of their position, and the leaves 
seem as if endeavouring to shrink into the pots below. The 
stipulated time for admitting protests has passed, yet the prizes 
have been awarded and exposed to the public, and officials are 
in a dilemma. 
What is the remedy for this unfortunate state of things ? It 
j must be practicable to be useful. It is not practicable for judges 
to spoil groups in searching for what may or may not exist in them. 
They assume, in the absence of apparent discrepancies, that they 
are in accordance with the schedule, and determine their relative 
merits as presented at the time, not as they will appear the next 
day. Seeing, then, that it may not be till some time after the 
judging that the exact state of things can be ascertained, it seems 
to us that the best way in which officials of shows can protect both 
themselves and exhibitors who conform with the schedule is to 
insert a proviso +o the eff ect that if anything is discovered before 
the dose of the show in contravention with the stipulations, that 
the prizes will be withheld. This would prevent unfair liberties 
being taken, or if it did not, the penalty imposed on the first 
delinquent would have the desired effect. But such a proviso 
should not go beyond the groups, as the judges should incur the 
full responsibility in adjudicating on all that i3 fully presented to 
them in the ordinary exercise of their duties, otherwise confusion 
j would soon rule supreme throughout the classes. 
Now we turn to the exhibition of fruit, and in connection 
therewith all schedules are not so clear as they should be. In Sep¬ 
tember next a great International Exhibition is to be held by the 
Royal Caledonian Horticultural Society in Edinburgh. “ Great,’ 
indeed, it is sure to be, and good, as we know from past expe¬ 
rience of the work of the Society and the indications in the 
schedule before us. This has not been sent officially, but by a 
correspondent who is in doubt on certain of the stipulations, 
and we are asked to examine those classes and state our views 
thereon. 
In section I., which is termed class, good prizes are offered for 
Pine Apples, and handsome amounts for Grapes ; but on turning to 
section II. (Grapes) we find that competitors in the preceding section 
are excluded. This we can quite understand as applied to Grapes, 
but why exhibitors of Pines in one section should be debarred from 
show'ing Grapes in the other is not so clear. The exclusion is 
perhaps not intended, and if not it would be as easy to make the 
matter clear as to leave it in doubt. 
Section III., which our correspondent describes as perhaps the 
most important in the schedule, makes provision for collections of 
fruit containing (a) twelve dishes of any sorts, (5) twelve dishes 
excluding Pines and Bananas, (c) twelve dishes exclusive of Grapes 
and Pines, and not more than two dishes of one variety. “ Why 
two dishes of one variety ? ” we are asked, but are not able to 
answer the question, and refer inquirers to the Committee. There 
No. 545.— Vol. XXI., Third Series 
No. 2201 .—Vol. LXXXIII., Old Series. 
