410 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER . 
[ Novemb r 4, 1886. 
to Mr. Jowitt, again proving mv statement that in such competitions the 
south has always had the pre-eminence, and at such a date the chances 
are a hundred to one that it must continue to do so.—D., Deal. 
It gave me great pleasure to read the letter signed “ Southern 
Amateur,” which appeared in the pages of the Journal of 21st October. Our 
northern Roses may well blush when so highly praised by so competent 
a judge and splendid exhibitor. It is certainly true that when they are 
in “ their full tide of glory ” they are as good as can be grown in the 
southern parts of England, and I believe they have too much self- 
respect to contend for a challenge trophy closed to their sisters in the 
south. Objecting on this ground to “ D., Deal’s" suggestion of 7th 
October, I wrote immediately to him, and threw out as an idea that if 
the points scored by the winners in the trophy class at the metropolitan 
show were duly noted and added to those subsequently gained by same 
exhibitors at the provincial show, we might arrive at a tolerably fair 
notion as to whom the trophy should be awarded. The money prizes 
might be paid for each class at each show as at present. 
I would have liked the principal class for Teas to have been included, 
so that the best all-round man might be recognised as the champion 
amateur Rose grower of the season. If this plan had been adopted it 
would have only conferred on Rev. Mr. Pemberton the position he has 
actually held for the two past seasons. I brought this forward at the 
spur of the mement simply as a crude idea, as there are at least three 
objections—first, that unless the season be an early one the northerners 
cannot show at all at the metropolitan, whereas the southerners can 
generally exhibit well till long past the middle of July, so the northerners 
are still left out in the cold ; secondly, there might be much confusion 
from want of time allowed for judging, and possibly mistakes in putting 
down the points ; thirdly, a good exhibitor with his Roses in grand form 
might be prevented by some other cause than want of blooms from putting 
in an appearance at cne of the two shows, and thus by a fluke the trophy 
might fall to one less worthy. I entirely agree with “ Southern Amateur ” 
that no true amateur cares for a walk over. 
If there is a big class oppn to noith and south, there the best Roses 
will be found, without reference to the trophy, and it would not be 
edifying to see the trophy carried off by an inferior stand. As in politics, 
so in Rose-exhibiting, the unity and integrity of the empire must be 
maintained, no splitting into northern and southern factions. 
I may be prejudiced, but I cannot help thinking that the metropolitan 
show is generally t o early for nine-tenths of the exhibitors. The Roses 
there appear to be feeble as compared with those we see later on. This 
may be due to the terrific heat we have experienced of late years at 
South Kensington, but since the final contest between Messrs. Jowitt and 
Baker in 1880, I do not remember any Roses competing for the trophy at 
all equal to their exhibits, but I may perhaps be allowed to quote the 
following extracts from the Journal of 8th July, 1880, in the report of 
that Show :—“ It will be safe to say that for the majority of growers the 
fixture, like all other exhibitions of the Society that have been held at the 
same place, was si me days too early.” Again, the report of the Wirral 
Show on 24th July, given in Journal of 29th, we read of the magni¬ 
ficence of Mr. Jowitt’s thirty-six, as well as of other Roses, and those at 
the National Show at Manchester on 17th are described as of “excep¬ 
tional quality, both as regards size and colour.” 
Mr. Mawley, in the “ Year Book ” of same year (1880), writes :—“ The 
cutbacks would seem to have been at their best about 12th July, and the 
maidens about 23rd of same month.” Mr. Whitwell took the trophy 
with lovely blooms in 1882, but I am sure he has very frequently 
exhibited much better Roses at a later period of the month, and I believe 
that to be the only year when his Roses have been early enough for 
exhibition at the metropolitan. The trophy should, in my opinion, be 
contended for in the midland counties, about the middle of July; but if 
this would really be hard on the Kent, Surrey, and Devonshire growers, 
then let us adopt the suggestion of “ Southern Amateur.” so that the 
southerners may have the trophy for one year, but would have to fight 
hard for it the next, when it would be contended for at the provincial 
show. With or without a chance of winning the trophy, we northerners 
understand the pleasure of fighting a battle which is always conducted on 
the principles of fair play, courtesy, and good fellowship.— Northern 
Amateur. 
“ Southern Amateur,” in his letter on page 361, puts the pertinent 
question, “ What do the northerners say ? ” I have since discussed the 
matter with one of the leading amateurs of the north, and found him 
strongly opposed to the establishment of a close class for a northern 
trophy, but somewhat in favour of the proposal for handing over the 
trophy to the provincial exhibition (assuming it to be held in the north) 
in alternate years. 
There is much to be said in support of this, and the matter is one that 
should be thoroughly discussed before the general meeting of the National 
Rose Society in December. I venture therefore now to bring forward a 
few arguments in favour of maintaining the existing arrangements, and 
start with the theory that a national trophy should be competed for at the 
chief show of the year, where the strongest competition takes place. 
Now on referring to past records, it appears that from 1882 inclusive the 
average number of competitors for the trophy at the London Show has 
been close on to ten, while in the premier class at the northern Show 
about half that number only have exhibited. Again, on looking at the 
names of the exhibitors at both shows there is little difference betwern 
them, the diminished number at the northern Show being caused by 
sou them exhibitors dropping out ; and as for results, if the proposed 
alteration had been carried out no gain would have resulted to the north, 
except perhaps in 1883, when Mr. Slaughter was first in London and 
Mr. Whitwell in Sheffield. Since that date Essex avd Surrey have 
divided the honours in the proportion of five to one. No rosarians have 
done more, both by example and precept, to teach what good Roses 
are and how they are to be produced, than the two leading amateurs of 
the north, and all would heartily rejoice to see the trophy either return 
to Durham or find a fresh temple in Cheshire or elsewhere. This result, 
however, should be brought about by natural causes, and not by fixing 
the contest at a date when the Roses of some of the strongest southern 
growers are over. The dates now adopted were not fixed for their, but 
for the general convenience of Rose exhibitors, and are indeed full late 
for some gardens. As an eximple of this I would instance Mr. Haywood’s 
Roses at the Reigate Show on the 1st July this year. Fine, indeed, as 
they were, we were told that they were then a little past their best, and it 
should be remembered that it was formerly the custom to hold two 
provincial shows, one before, and the other after the London Show. 
Moreover Durham has won on July 4th, and that which has been done 
once may be done again. “ D., Deal," has told us each year of late that 
the season has been an abnormal one, and probably this may account for 
the lateness of the Roses. In support of this view Mr. Hall’s interesting 
article on Roses in Cheshire in the “ Rosarian’s Year Book ” of 1884 may 
be quoted. He speaks therein of having to re-prune on the 17th May, 
1883, in consequence of a severe April frost, and adds that his blooms 
were consequently late, the harvest commencing on July 4th. Now if 
plants will come into flower at this date in the north after such severe 
treatment, it is not unreasonable to suppose that with more genial seasons 
the northern amateur may again come to the front without the need of 
special legislation to enable him to do so.— North Herts. 
THREE NEW CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 
New and meritorious Chrysanthemums are numerous this season, and 
cultivators will have to make some important additions to their collections 
for another year. Japanese varieties, as usual, preponderate, and the 
trio represented (necessarily much reduced in size) in our illustration 
(fig. 69) are remarkable alike for their distinctness and fine substance. 
William Holmes is one of the best early flowering Japanese we 
have, the plant of good, compact, yet free habit, being admirably adapted 
for culture in p ts in the conservatory. The blooms are of medium size 
as regards diameter, but they are relatively deep with recurving flat or 
slightly fluted florets, of a deep red colour, the reverse bronze, and the 
young incurving florets form a pretty contrast with the other portion of 
the bloom. As an October variety this will take a prominent place, and 
it may be seen at some of the earliest shows, the plant being useful for 
grouping. It was certificated at the Royal Hoiticultural Society’s meet¬ 
ing on October 12th this year, when blooms were shown by Mr. G. 
Stevens of Putney and Messrs. H. CanneU & Sons, Swanley ; it was also 
again honoured by the Nath nal Chrysanthemum Society on October 13th, 
the blooms being exhibited by Mr. N. Davis of Camberwell and Mr. 
G. Stevens, and from all these exhibitors we have received specimen 
blooms. 
La Triomphante is a handsome Japanese variety, somewhat early, but 
it forms a grand bloom and will make an excellent show variety. In 
Mr. Ridout’s winning stand of twenty-four varieties at South Kensington 
last week it was a very prominent back-row bloom, one of the best in 
the collection, and it was shown in even better condition by Mr. J. 
Martin, gardener to C. N. Kidd, Esq., West Hill House. Dartford, at the 
Westminster Aquarium the following day. On the same occasion it was 
exhibited by several other growers, and certificates were awarded for it 
by the Floral Committee of the National Chrysanthemum Society to Mr. 
Shoosmith, Hythe, Messrs. H. Cannell & Sons, and Mr. Martin, one of 
the blooms shown by the last named being represented in our illustration. 
The blooms are of good size when well grown, with straight, broad, 
rather flat florets of a pale purplish rose colour, a delicate and pleasing 
shade. It is one of Reydellet’s varieties, and is included in the revised 
edition of the National Society’s catalogue issued this year. 
Phcebus is of English origin, having been raised by Mr. Alfred Salter, 
and sent out by Messrs. J. Yeitch & Sons in the spring of the present 
year. It is a Japanese variety with long recurving fluted florets, some¬ 
what flat in its early stage, but assuming the character depicted in our 
engraving when it becomes more developed. The bloom figured was 
shown by Mr. Martin on the same occasion as La Triomphante, and, like 
that, indicated superior cultivation, being clean and of great substance, 
much the best example of the variety we have seen. It is noteworthy 
for its bright clear yellow tint, a shade something in the way of Frizou, 
very pure and rich. Both Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons and Mr. Martin 
obtained certificates for the variety at the meeting named. 
TRENCHED v. UNTRENCHED SOIL. 
Your able correspondent, Mr. Iggulden, certainly deserves the highest 
commendation for the courage he has displayed in defending his non¬ 
trenching theory in spite of so many adverse criticisms. In his last com¬ 
munication on this subject (page 345) he has as usual attempted to justify 
the soundness of his theory by adducing a number of argumenis and 
Lustrations, but these tend to weaken rather than support his case. 
However honest his convictions may be on this impoitant point at issue, 
the position he has taken up is an untenable one, and one which at no 
distant date he will have to unconditionally surrender to the “ other 
side.” This is at once apparent to those who have read the second para- 
