110 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ Febiotry Ifr, 1801. 
The failure in presenting the necessary “resolution ” for com¬ 
pleting a resignation has in this case involved non-compliance with 
the very important by-law G5, which states, “ At every annual 
meeting of the Soc'ety three members of the Council shall be 
removed by ballot of the Fellows present, and the vacancies so 
created shall be filled up by the election of three other discreet 
Fellows of the Society.” Mr. Morris, as we have shown, was 
actually a member of Council, and therefore his election sgain 
does not and cannot count, and it follows that only two new 
members were elected—namely. Sir John Llewelyn, Bart., and 
Mr. G. Bunyard. Mr. Crowley|conld not be elected on the Council 
because his name had not been inserted 'in the form provided for 
that purpose under by-law 83, which states, “ The Council shall 
prepare two balloting lists, including the names of any Fellow 
or Fellows proposed for removal or election.” The first of these 
lists (F in the Appendix) refers to the Council, the second (G) 
to officers. For election on the Council it was necessary for 
]\Ir. Crowley’s name to be in the first list, printed and circulated 
among the Fellows in January. This was not done. His name 
was not in the “ Council ” list, where it ought to have been ; but 
Mr. Morris’s was, and it w’as not necessary it should be, therefore 
Mr. Crowley’s was put in the “officers’” list, and recommended 
as Treasurer, but that could not entitle him to election as such, 
because the charter clearly states that the Treasurer “ shall ” be 
elected “ from among the members of the Council.” !Mr. Crowley’s 
name ought to have been in both lists under the circumstances ; 
he would then have first been elected on the Council, and next as 
Treasurer. He has never been elected on the Council in prescribed 
legal form, and was consequently not legally elected as Treasurer. 
Through some misapprehension two admirable business men have 
been made to checkmate each other, with the result that one of 
them remains in the position from which he sought to retire, and 
the other is debarred from an office that he was desired to fill. 
In referring to our note (page 111), the Chairman of the meet¬ 
ing stated there had been some misapprehension of the by-laws 
which the Secretary would explain. No doubt there had been 
some “ misapprehension,” but not by us. With all the by-laws 
quoted by the Secretary we are quite familiar, and wm know that 
their interpretation must not be in conflict with the charter. We 
were not likely to question the power of the Council to fill up 
vacancies that may occur on the Board between two annual meet¬ 
ings. This can of course be done, but ‘for how long ? “ Until the 
annual meeting next following.” That is what the charter says, and 
the principle applies to all the by-laws affecting vacancies quoted 
by the Secretary, and published in our report of the meeting on 
page 125. The reservation is of fundamental import, for it deprives 
the Council of the power of abrogating the rights of the members 
of the Society at their annual meeting. The precise words we 
have quoted are not in the by-laws, but they are in the charter ; 
and at the head of the by-laws there is a note printed in italics which 
says, “ Where any conflict, contradiction, or repugnance appears or 
seems to arise, the words or meaning of the charter must 'prevail." 
The Secretary is reported as having said that “Mr. Morris had 
resigned, and Mr. Crowley had been appointed to fill the vacancy 
thuscaused, butas Mr. Morris was expected to return next month, 
he had been nominated for re-election because his services had 
proved so valuable to the Council.” The Council was empowered 
to appoint Mr. Crowley last autumn, but only until the annual 
meeting, and Mr. Morris’ resignation was not complete, and could 
only bo made so by the act of the general meeting. If it had been 
accepted by the meeting (to which it was not even submitted), he 
would not have been eligible for re-election at that meeting, because 
the charter and by-laws clearly state that three “ other ” discreet 
Fellows shall be elected than those which retire. The officers are 
re-eligible, but not retiring members of Council. There was no 
occasion to nominate Mr. Morris, but Mr. Crowley’s name ought to 
have appeared in the form instead, and then the services of both 
these gentlemen would have been_ secured on the Council. We 
sugge.fel a way out of the difficulty before the meeting, and 
Mr. Crowley can act as Treasurer yet if Mr. Morris again in pre¬ 
scribed form re signs that position, thus creating a vacancy to which 
IMr. Crowley can be appointed until the next meeting in 1892, 
and be can then in due form be placed on the Council by that 
m.eeting. At present it has to be considered wbetber be can 
make a valid payment or give a legal receipt on behalf of the- 
Society, for Mr. Morris remains in law the only Treasurer. 
But there is another and very important matter connected with 
this election that has been overlooked by the Council, and that is 
the validity of the voting papers. By-law 81 says, “Vacancies in 
the Council created by the resignation or removal or incapacity by 
an annual meeting of any member of the Council shall be deemed' 
to be extraordinary vacancies ; all other vacancies in the Council 
shall be deemed to be ordinary vacancies.” 
Assuming Mr. Morris’s resignation had been valid through its 
acceptance by the annual meeting it would have been an extraordinaryr 
vacancy, and consequently there would have been one more added 
to the three that retired according to by-law C5, making the number 
of vacancies four. But on the retiring list there were only three,, 
and these were distinguished by the prefix of R, which means “ that 
the removal of the member against whose name that letter is placed 
is recommended.” Not a word of the extraordinary vacancy 
caused by the supposed resignation of Mr. Morris, whose name ough t. 
to have had the prefix of v, to indicate “ that a vacancy has been 
created in the office of the member against whose name that letter 
is placed by death or incapacity from illness or otherwise.” 
It is with no unkind feeling that we write these lines, but from 
an earnest desire that the Society should be conducted “ discreetly,” 
and in accordance with the charter that we are solicitous about the 
modes of procedure. The Society is, forturately for itself, 
working under a charter, and it behoves those who are entrusted" 
with its administration to bear this in mind, for any departure 
from the prescribed forms may land the Society into unforeseen, 
difficulties. 
THE FAKCY PANSY. 
It is now forty years since the late John Salter first brought 
this lovely race of Pansies before the public, and in a few years 
English and French growers began to send out attractive varieties. 
Not, however, to remain popular ; for when exhibited at the horti¬ 
cultural societies they did not gain favour, and would, no doubt, 
soon have been lost in oblivion had not one with a keen eye 
for novelties and improvement in the Pansy taken more than a 
passing interest in the flower, and notwithstanding the jeers of his 
brother florists, pioneered the subject of this paper through many 
a hot discussion, and even ventured to predict its recognition as a 
florists’ flower on the exhibition table. It was in 1858 that Mr. 
Wm. Dean, the recognised father of the Fancy Pansy, gave so much 
impetus to the flower, and soon improved forms of his seedlings 
were figured in the Florist and Floral Magazine. Thus the foun¬ 
dation was laid, and it must be a great source of pleasure to Mr. 
Dean, who is still happily amongst us, to see the perfection hia 
favourite has attained. It is in Scotland, however, that the Pansy 
is seen in its best dress ; the cool climate being well suited for its 
cultivation. We are also indebted to our friends in Scotland for 
the finest varieties in commerce. 
The improvement during the last three years is, perhaps, the- 
greatest advance the Fancy Pansy has ever made. It is true when 
such old favourites as May Tate, Evelyn Bruce, Catherine Agnes,. 
William Cuthbertson, Mrs. Jamieson, &c., were introduced they 
were recognised as decided acquisitions ; but there was a sameness 
in their marking, although improved in form, and they have not 
retained the dense solid blotch with which they were introduced, a 
feature which we should like to see perpetuated in the Farcy 
Pansy. We have now, however, a distinct break in colour with 
every other good property, and the raisers of such grand sorts as 
Lord Hamilton, William Ross, Mrs. Atkinson, Tom Travis, J. J. 
Ashton, Miss Hudson, M. A. Scott, Lizzie Duncan, Alexander 
Smith, Mrs. Mark, Helen Christie, Mrs. John McConnell, &c., have 
great reason to be proud of their work. It is only a pity these, 
improved forms are not brought more prominently before the 
public. 
The Pansy is perhaps the most popular flower in cultivation ;• 
indeed, there are few gardens without a collection. For all 
