384 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ Ootober 28, 1886. 
red spider or scorched with heat during hot weather. This is my ex¬ 
perience in the south of England. Mr. Murphy should add to his early- 
flowering Chrysanthemums Flora, a Pompon, one of the most free- 
flowering and earliest I know. It has been in bloom with me since the 
15th of July, and now. the 23rd October, is a mass of flowers. 
“ C. S., Bristol," should regulate the time of “ taking the buds ” by 
the time he requires them to bloom. Early varieties when required 
during mid-season, say November the 15th, should be taken from lateral 
buds, and late sorts from crown buds. Dates are of little use, as seasons 
vary, also localities, and few growers will find time to refer to them. I have 
come to the conclusion that “ T. P.” has left the whole of the buds 
surrounding the central, and not disbudded, hence the Hen-and-chickens 
or bouquet of flowers. 
Belle Paule, again. I should imagine that your correspondent 
“B. D. K.’s” plants of the above were attacked with red spider, or 
scalded during the very hot weather we had in August. I have <fien 
known the variety Fleur de Marie to perform the freaks described by 
“ B. D. K.” The plants grow freely until hot weather begins, and then 
gradually become weak, and the leaves assume a scalded appearance and 
often die. The cause of this I should like to know from some other 
growers of experience, as I could never satisfy myself with my own 
conclusions. Belle Paule is the correct name of the Japanese variety, 
but I had it from the French under the name < f Belle Pauline. Messrs. 
Thibaut et Keteeler should lead MM. Thibaut et Keteeler. The first is 
part English and part French. 
Aurantium I see is changed in the Society’s catalogue to Aurantia. 
Why this change? I had this variety sent me from Salter of Ham¬ 
mersmith about eighteen years ago under the first name, Aurantium. 
Magnum Bonum still retains its termination of “um.” If Magnum Bonum 
is right, why is it that Roseum superbum is wrong, and changed to the 
one found in the Society’s catalogue ? — Robt. Owen, The Floral Nurseries, 
Maidenhead. 
Hen and Chickens Chrysanthemums. —It may interest “T. P.” 
to know that last year I had forty plants of Japanese Chrysanthemums 
that gave me hen-and-chicken buds. The buds were “ taken ” the first 
week in August; they did not develope perfect flowers and had to be cut 
down. This year not a bud was taken till the third week in August, and 
I have no blooms of the above description. But I believe that to have 
early-flowering varieties at their best in the first week of November the 
buds should not be taken till the first week in September, as on October 
21st I had a few plants of James Salter and Elaine at their best.— 
A. L. a. 
Chrysanthemum Emperor.—Taking the Buds. —I am pleased 
to see that all are agreed that Emperor is not a hybrid Anemone. Can 
Soeur Melanie and other hybrid Pompons be shown in a class for Pom¬ 
pons ? and, if so, would it be awarded the full number of points ? I have 
sent a bloom, which appears to me more like a small reflexed than a 
Pompon. I also Bend wood and flower of a Queen of England, which you 
will see has many centres, and, from the notes in this week’s Journal, 
there seems to be many about, and think by comparing notes we may find 
out the reason. Can it be through taking the buds too early ? I wrote 
in the middle of May asking advice, as I thought they were making the 
first breaks too early, asking whether it would not be best to stop the 
breaks in June, so as to retard the crown buds. Mr. Molyneux advised 
to let them grow, and if they set too early to take them up to the 
next. The Queen family and other incurved commenced setting early in 
August, and as I wanted some early in the season and some late, I divided 
them. The plants that showed before the 10th of August of the Queens 
were taken up to the next bud, and now look promising for good if 
small flowers. Queen of England and Alfred Salter, taken on the 16th, are 
like the bloom sent. Empress of India, Lord Alcester, and Golden 
Empress, taken four and six days later, look much better, and I think 
will finish some big but rough flowers. The nearer I got to the 1st of 
September, Mr. Molyneux’s date, the better they promise. Princess Teck 
and Hero of Stoke Newington, taken August 13th, are just showing 
colour, the centres being scaly, like the Queens, while buds of the same 
varieties, taken September 6th and 9th, are commencing to open, and look 
well. Barbara, takea August 11th, looks as if it would finish a good 
flower. At one time I thought they would be of no use. They have 
shown colour for four weeks, and they will take quite two more to finish 
them, as the centre is full of small florets. Cherub, taken August 14tb, 
also promises a good flower. I do not see any resemblance between 
Belle Paule and Eve as Mr. Murphy says there is.— Chrysanthemum, 
Sussex. 
National Chrysanthemum Society’s Catalogue. —I thank 
l 'B, D. K.” for his somewhat kindly criticism on this catalogue, in the 
preparation of which I took a small part, but I think he misinterprets my 
meaning when I complained, as he terms it, of the public taking little 
interest in the work. The difficulty mostly experienced in the prepara¬ 
tion was to make the classifications and descriptions tally as nearly as 
possible with what we considered to be the general opinion amongst 
growers upon various controversial points. The first issue of this work 
was from time to time rather severely criticised, and I own there was 
much in it that required amending, and my complaint was meant to 
convey tbe query, “ Where were the critics when they were mostly 
wanted ? ” Some of “ B. D. K.’s ” remarks are inconsistent. He first 
tells us what we ought to have done, and then blames us fcr what 
actually was done in the direction he points out. I will answer the few 
queries in “ B. D. K.’s ” notes. He refers to the absurdity of the name 
Messrs. Thibaut et Keteleer having been demonstrated in the columns 
of a contemporary. I read most of the leading gardening papers, but I 
do not recollect having seen these demonstrations, but I would ask, Is 
there any more absurdity in the name of Messrs. Thibaut et Keteleer 
than in the names of Madame John Laing (his own quotation), Mons. 
John Laing, Mons. N. Davis, Madame Canneli, &c. P These are English 
names, and yet they are allowed to have French prefixes. With regard 
to Belle Paule, the reason we did not apply to M. Marrouch was because, 
unfortunately for the Chrysanihemum interest, this greatest of all Chrys¬ 
anthemum raisers, to whom we owe so many of our superb back row 
flowers, died some time since, as already mentioned in the Journal of 
Horticulture, nor would there have been any necessity had he been alive, 
for the que-tion was settled twelve months ago by referring to several of 
the French catalogues, including M. Marrouch’s own agents, and that 
of his successors, to whom his collection was sold to. Independent of 
this information, I fail to see why Pauline, being a common female name 
in France, it should be the correct name in this instance. Monsieur 
Delaux is a Frenchman, and does he not know his own language when he 
gives us the names of Mons. Paul Fabre (masculine), and Mdlle. Paule 
Dutour (feminine) ? Next as to Triomphe de la Rue des Cb&lets. If 
“B. D. K.” will refer to the “Horticultural Directory,” published at 
171, Fleet Street, he will find Messrs. Pertuze’s place of business is in 
the Rue des Chalets, and that the Tiiomphe was no doubt named after the 
nursery it was raised in. This is not surmised, however, for we have 
the confirmation in his catalogue. Next as to Bertie Rendatler. Madame 
is taken from this name, because here we actually had one of those 
absurdities “ B. D. K.” speaks of, and I am surprised at his inconsistency. 
Bertier is a man’s name, and when we search the records, as he would 
have us do, we find two distinct flowers, Bertier Randatler and Madame 
Berthier, which have been confused in this country. Lastly, as to the 
terminations “ um ” and “ a ” that seem to puzzle many people. We 
were called upon to settle this among other questions, and as we had not 
the benefit of “B. D. K.’s” help, we spent some six weeks in correspond¬ 
ing with Latin and French scholars, and were able to arrive at a con¬ 
clusion on the subject. 
I think “ B. D. K.” will thus perceive that the catalogue has not been 
compiled in the clumsy way he thinks; and considering the work took 
over five months of correspondence with every raiser in France that 
could in any way help us in the matter, I think “ B. D. K.” might 
himself have taken rather more pains in his researches before venturing to 
criticise.—N. Davis, Camberwell. 
Taking Chrysanthemum Buds.— Your correspondent, “ C. L., 
Bristol," appears to have made a mistake in “taking” the buds of his 
Chrysanthemums at too early a date. I consider he is to blame entirely 
for this. If he had followed my advice a little more closely he would 
perhaps not. have found it necessary to condemn the dates I advised; and 
another thing I should like to impress upon him, that when he has had a 
little more experience he will find that if he wishes to have good blooms 
of the varieties he names first in his note he will be compelled to have 
them fully expanded by the time he states they are fully out, as these 
varieties are naturally rather early in blooming. 1 will now point out 
where “ C. L.” acted wrongly, and in consequence does not do justice to 
my advice. He says the buds were showing by the 1st of August. Now, 
there is a wide difference in this date and the time I noted—the 18th of 
August. Where I named the 18th inst. I quoted the varieties which 
were better for that selection of bud-taking. From the 1st to the 18th of 
August is a long time to a Chrysanthemum plant at that season of the 
year receiving proper attention, which “ C. L.’s ” plants did not have, or 
the buds would not have remained six days without being “taken” or 
removed. Perhaps he thinks this of no importance ; if so, he makes a 
great mistake, and in consequence condemns my advice as being wron g. 
Now, surely this cannot be right and just. It would be better were he to 
act upon it first strictly, and I still contend, in spite of all “ C. L.” can 
say against it, that the times I gave are the best in a general way. One 
cannot be expected to search into all parts of every county in England 
and ascertain what times meet the views of every grower of Chrysan¬ 
themums. The “three growers from Devonshire’’ will continue to find 
as long as they reside in that part how difficult it is to obtain blooms in 
the middle of November fit to compete in tbe best company grown from 
crown buds as far south as the county named. “ C. L.” seems to consider 
that because the “ gardener who is both a grower and exhibitor of these 
flowers ” had “ taken ” none of his buds at the time of his visit, the last 
week in August, my advice was altogether wrong. Perhaps “ C. L 
would do better to wait and see if the authority he quotes proves by his 
own produce that his blooms are superior to those “ taken ” at the time I 
advise. 
Chrysanthemum Emperor. —I should like to inform Mr. Davis 
that the reason my colleagues and myself disqualified the stand of Chrysan¬ 
themum blooms at the Crystal Palace Show last year, which contained the 
“ supposed ” Emperor, was, that we did not consider it was Emperor, but 
some other variety named in mistake. This was the simple reason. The 
point was well considered before we arrived at the conclusion that the 
flower did not belong to the Show Anemones, but to the Anemone 
Japanese. I know that Emperor in its true form is a first-class 
variety. In my note, p. 338, I said the “supposed” bloom of Emperor 
was not “ true.” What 1 meant was this, that it was not correctly named ; 
it was staged in all good faith, but we did not consider it was that 
variety. Certainly I should not disqualify a stand of blooms containing 
