August 19, 1886. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
149 
19 
Th 
Maidenhead Show. 
20 
F 
Exeter Show. 
21 
S 
Cheadle (Cheshire) Show. 
22 
SUN 
9tu Sunday after Trinity. 
28 
M 
21 
TU 
Royal Horticultural Society (Commitiees at 11 a.m.). C.ttagers' Show. 
25 
w 
Beading, Ludlow, and Brighton Shows. 
THE HOLLYHOCK REVIVAL. 
LORICULTURAL visitors to the Royal Horti¬ 
cultural Society’s Show and meeting at South 
Kensington recently were surprised to observe 
the reappearance of the Hollyhock as a portion 
of the floral attractions, and with a considerable 
share of its former charms. After the lapse of 
ten years, during which time the Society has not 
certificated one variety of Hollyhock, we find 
quite unexpectedly three or four collections of fine 
blooms staged, and no less than four novelties are deemed 
worthy of honours. Whether the destructive fungus has rim 
its course and finally ceased to trouble us, or whether the 
present immunity is the result of the season merely, cannot 
be determined. One thing is certain—Hollyhocks are this 
year finer than they have been for a decade, and all agreed 
in regarding it as a most favourable omen for admirers and 
cultivators of this stately plant. It is not unreasonable to 
hope that we may again see the plants occupying the position 
they so well deserve in gardens, and that cut-flower depart¬ 
ments of late summer shows may be graced by their bold 
handsome spikes. 
As a “ landscape ” flower the Hollyhock is unrivalled, the 
Foxglove, beautiful though it is, being of less imposing 
stature, and not so useful in distant effects. The former can, 
however, be employed with grand results if it is planted 
judiciously and in suitable places ; its tall spires tower above 
all ordinary herbaceous plants and dwarf shrubs, and it can 
consequently be employed to excellent purpose in the back¬ 
ground of herbaceous border or the foreground of shrub¬ 
beries. Being somewhat formal in general character, espe¬ 
cially the double varieties, Hollyhocks a,re seldom seen to 
the best advantage when disposed in straight lines or in any 
other formal manner. A bold irregular, but not crowded, 
group in a distant part of the flower garden is perhaps the 
most effective way of planting them ; or where it is desirable 
to plant them near the house they are best in borders near 
walls, or with a background of shrubs, as they do not look 
well in isolated beds close to the windows. Some years ago 
a grand display of these plants used to be provided at 
Hampton Court Palace Gardens, and arranged as these were 
close to the building and facing the walk which extends to 
the Thames, they had a fine appearance. The common 
single varieties are by no means to be despised, for though 
they would not satisfy the requirements of a florist, there is 
something charmingly picturesque about vigorous plants of 
the single Hollyhock such as are seen in country cottage 
gardens. Many have had occasion to deplore the loss of their 
plants during recent years, and their restoration would be a 
distinct gain to the floricultural world. 
The Hollyhock is one of our oldest introduced plants, and 
though several dates have been given by various authorities, 
there seems to be considerable uncertainty as to when it first 
appeared in this country. Probably it was some time about 
the middle of the sixteenth century, for it is mentioned by 
No. 311. —Vol. XIII., Third Series. 
the old herbalists, Gerard, Parkinson, and others, as common 
in gardens, both single and double varieties being described 
and figured. It is a Chinese plant, and has there been culti¬ 
vated for a long time, seeds having been distributed thence 
through many parts of Asia, and finally to Europe; and 
some have thought that he referred to this plant when he 
mentioned a “Rose growing on stalks like the Mallow.” 
The older English writers do not give much information 
respecting the introduction of the plant, though it was 
evidently regarded with considerable favour at the time 
Johnson’s edition of Gerard’s “ Herball ” was published— 
namely, in 1633, for it is stated that “ these Hollihockes are 
sown in gardens almost everywhere.” Rather more than a 
century later Milier gave very full cultural directions, and 
remarks that he had double and single varieties with white, 
pale red, deep red, blackish red, purple, yellow, and flesh- 
coloured flowers. He also observes that, “besides these, I 
saw many years ago some plants with variegated flowers in 
the garden of the late Lord Burlington, in London, raised 
from seeds which came from China.” From seeds supplied 
to Miller by a Mr. Charles du Bois, of Mitcham, in 1726, 
which were originally obtained from Madras, “ many double 
varieties of several colours ” were raised, which no doubt 
helped to improve the race considerably. Martyn adds to 
the edition of Miller’s “ Dictionary,” published in 1807, that 
“ a dwarf sort with beautiful double variegated flowers has 
been in great esteem for some years past under the name of 
Chinese Hollyhock.” 
The greatest successes were, however, reserved for the 
florists of the nineteenth century. Numbers of handsome 
double varieties were raised, classes were provided for it at 
exhibitions all over the country, and the plant became an 
established favourite. From about 1850 to 1870 was the 
period in which the Hollyhock gained the greatest number of 
admirers, and some idea can be formed of its popularity by 
consulting the certificate records of the Royal Horticultural 
Society’s Floral Committee. Thus from 1859 to 1871 seventy- 
six varieties were certificated, and no less than thirty-nine of 
these were raised by Mr. Chater of Saffron Walden, the Rev. 
E. Hawke following in point of numbers as a raiser, and 
Messrs. Downie, Laird and Laing next. In the succeeding 
twelve years—namely, from 1872 to 1884, the total fell to 
fifteen, shared nearly equally by Hawke and Chater, but the 
last one certificated was Virgin Queen (Chater), August 2nd, 
1876, and from that time to the present Hollyhocks have 
disappeared from the list. 
Everyone knows that this sudden downfall was not due to 
a change of public taste, but to the appearance of a fungus, 
which came as unexpectedly as the Potato disease, attacked a 
plant that had been in cultivation for 300 years, and wrought 
as great a devastation as the Peronospora. The coincidence 
does not end there. The Puccinia malvacearum is also a 
Chilian fungus, and according to Mr. W. T. Thiselton Dyer 
it was first described by Montagne from specimens collected 
in Chili by Bertero, where it principally attacked the Marsh 
Mallow (Althsea officinalis). From there it seems to have 
found its way to Australia, thence to Spain, and became very 
destructive in France in 1873. The fungologist, Professor 
De Bary, has expressed some doubt about the introduction 
of the fungus from Chili. I do not know upon what evidence, 
but he confirms the European spread of the fungus. The 
Rev. M. J. Berkeley has stated that there was no record of 
the fungus in this country until July 12th, 1873, and that it 
was firsl observed on an extensive scale in France on June 
26th of the same year. When once it obtainea hold here it 
extended with great rapidity, and collections in all parts of 
the kingdom were soon infected, and hundreds of thousands 
of plants were destroyed, as no effective method of combat¬ 
ing it could be found. In two years from the time it was 
first observed the majority of the finest Hollyhocks were 
extinct, and some of the most experienced growers had to 
discontinue issuing lists, as they could not supply plants. 
No. 1977 —Vol. LXXV., Old Series 
