484 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ November 30, 1893. 
of the same year was also equally well represented. This is an 
easily grown hirsute variety, but owing to its dull purple colour is 
not, I think, likely to advance in popular favour. Mr. A. H. Neve 
(1890) takes up a good place at No. 15. William Tricker (No. 27) 
also introduced in 1891, stands well considering that this is its first 
appearance in the analysis. Miss Anna Hartshorn (No. 31), first 
sent out in 1889, was shown last year three times as frequently as 
at the previous exhibition. We then reach an 1891 variety, Mdlle. 
Marie Hoste, which, although new to the analysis, already stands 
at No. 33. Mr. E. Beckett (1892) a still newer candidate for 
honours will be found at No. 39. Then lower down follow 
Coronet (1889) at No. 42, Alberic Lunden (1890) at No. 44, Mrs. 
Alpheus Hardy, that delicately constituted white variety \\ith 
hairy petals which all growers are so proud to stage in good con¬ 
dition, also at No. 44, M. E. A. Carri^re (1889) at No. 46, Beauty 
of Castlewood (1892) at No. 48, Pink Lacroix (1889) also at No. 48, 
Lilian B. Bird (1890) at No. 50, Cesare Costa (1890) at No. 52, 
Mrs. Irving Clark (1889) at No. 52, Eynsford White (1889) 
at No. 57, and lastly, Vice-President Audiguier (1890) also at 
No. 57. 
INCURVED 
The above new varieties are placed in the list according to the 
number of times they were staged at the Royal Aquarium Show 
last year, in order to give them every possible chance of competing 
with their more established brethren. There is, however, one 
disturbing cause afEecting the very newest sorts in the table, but 
these only, for which I am unable to apply any correction, and yet 
which must in exceptional cases have considerable influence on 
the positions they are assigned, for I am told that in some instances 
it is impossible for a new variety to be well represented on its 
first appearance, owing to the limited number of plants available 
for distribution when it is first sent out. 
The contrast between the incurved and Japanese sections is 
very marked, whether we take the average ages of the leading 
varieties or the changes from year to year. For instance, taking 
the first twenty-four sorts in each case we find the average age of 
the former to be twenty-one years, whereas the first twenty-four 
Japanese average only six years. As I have already stated, only 
five Japanese varieties which were classed among the first twenty- 
four kinds six years ago are now to be found in the same number 
of leading flowers. Treating the incurved varieties in (*ee p. 486 ) 
VARIETIES. 
Position in Present 
Analysis. 
Average Number of 
Times Shown. 
No. of Times 
Shown in 1892 in 
True Relative Propor¬ 
tion to the Average. 
Name 
Date of 
Introduction. 
Raiser’s 
or 
Introducer’s 
Name. 
Colour. 
1 
56-3 
56 
Empress of India. 
1861 
Downie, Laird & Laing 
Pure white 
2 
51-6 
58 
Lord Alcester . 
1882 
Freemantle . 
Pale primrose 
3 
49-6 
50 
Queen of England . 
1847 
J. Salter. 
Delicate rose blush 
4 
46 3 
38 
Golden Empress of India . 
1877 
Loader . 
Pale yellow 
5 
44-0 
34 
Miss M. A. Haggas . 
1888 
Hayes. 
Soft bright yellow 
6 
42 5 
34 
Miss Violet Tomlin. 
1888 
Doughty. 
Bright violet purple 
7 
40 3 
50 
Golden Queen of England . 
1859 
J. Salter. 
Pale straw colour 
8 
400 
34 
Jeanne d’Arc. 
1881 
Lacroix . 
Blush w’hite, tipped purple 
9 
37-3 
50 
Princess of Wales. 
1865 
Davis . 
Blush, tinted rose 
10 
37 1 
44 
Lord Wolseley. 
1883 
Orchard .. 
Bronzy red 
11 
36-0 
17 
John Salter . 
1866 
J. Salter. 
Cinnamon, orange centre 
12 
33 3 
20 
Alfred Salter. 
1856 
J. Salter. 
Clear lilac pink 
13 
32-2 
16 
Prince Alfred . 
1863 
Davis . 
Rose carmine, shaded purple 
14 
30-5 
30 
Mrs. S. Coleman . 
1889 
Russell . 
Bright rose, shaded yellow 
15 
30 0 
30 
John Doughty . 
1889 
Doughty. 
Bronze fawn, suffused rose 
16 
27-0 
24 
Nil Desperandum. 
1862 
Smith. 
Dark orange red 
17 
23-7 
20 
Lady Hardinge. 
1861 
Clark . 
Silvery rose 
18 
23-6 
24 
Mrs. Heale. 
1867 
Heale. 
Pure white 
19 
23-3 
6 
Barbara . 
1869 
J Salter . 
Bright amber, shaded orange 
Fawn colour 
20 
21-9 
20 
Mrs, W. Shipman. 
1878 
Shipman. 
21 
21-7 
13 
Jardin des Plantes . 
1859 
J. Salter . 
Deep golden yellow 
22 
21-3 
14 
Princess of Teck . 
1868 
Pethers . 
White, suffused pink 
23 
19-0 
19 
Madame Darier. 
1890 
Sautel. 
Yellow, shaded purple 
Rose purple 
23 
19'0 
19 
Monsieur R. Bahuant. 
1890 
Hoste . 
24 
17-2 
6 
Hero of Stoke Newington . 
1873 
Forsyth . 
Rose pink 
25 
15-0 
8 
Cherub . 
1862 
Smith. 
Orange, tinted rose bronze 
26 
13-7 
8 
Empress Eug4nie. 
1866 
Pethers . 
Rosy lilac 
26 
13-7 
11 
Refulgens . 
1873 
Hock . 
Rich purple maroon 
27 
13-3 
6 
Mr. Brunlees. 
1884 
Smith. 
Indian red, tipped gold 
28 
13-2 
11 
Mr. Bunn . 
1881 
Bunn . 
Bright golden yellow 
29 
13 0 
13 
Camille B. Flammarion. 
1889 
Sautel. 
Dark violet 
30 
12 6 
11 
Princess Beatrice. 
1868 
Wyness . 
Delicate rosy pink 
31 
12-4 
5 
Prince of Wales . 
1865 
Davis . 
Purple 
32 
11-0 
11 
Alfred Lyne . 
1888 
Lyne . 
Rose lilac 
33 
10-3 
8 
Lady Dorothy . 
1887 
Buss . 
Cinnamon buff, suffused rose 
34 
10 0 
5 
White Venus. 
1872 
Shrimpton. 
Pure white 
35 
9 0 
9 
Mrs. Robinson King . 
1891 
Hotham. 
Rich yellow 
Sd 
90 
5 
Venus. 
1863 
J. Salter. 
Lilac, suffused pink 
36 
8-5 
6 
Robert Cannell. 
1891 
Cannell . 
Crimson and golden bronze 
37 
8-0 
8 
Ami Hoste. 
1890 
Sautel. 
Buff yellow, striped carmine 
38 
7 5 
2 
Mrs. Norman Davis. 
1886 
Mizen. 
Rich golden yellow 
39 
7-1 
13 
Novelty. 
1860 
Clark . 
Blush 
40 
7-0 
2 
Charles Gibson. 
1887 
Mizen. 
Bronze red, centre fawn 
41 
6-6 
3 
Beverley. 
1863 
Smith. 
Cream white 
42 
6-4 
6 
Golden Eagle . 
1863 
Davis . 
Reddish bronze, tipped orange 
43 
5-6 
5 
Baron Beust. 
1868 
Pethers . 
Chestnut red, shaded yellow 
44 
5-4 
0 
Mabel Ward. 
1882 
Ward . 
Buff yellow 
45 
5-1 
5 
Eve. 
1865 
Smith. 
Cream white 
46 
5 0 
0 
Bronze Queen of England . 
1886 
Carter. 
Bronze brown, tinted rose 
