222 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[. September 7, 1893. 
_ Steam versus Hot Water Heating.—M uch has been said 
about the preference displayed by the florists on the other side of the 
Atlantic for steam heating, but Archibald Lawson of Chestnut Hill is, 
says the “ American Florist,” changing his system of heating from steam 
to hot water. He says that as he only has about 4000 feet of glass it 
does not pay to have a night fireman, and as the old system does not 
require such close attention as steam he thinks it will be profitable 
to make the change. 
- Summary of Meteorological Observations at Hodsock 
Priory, Worksop, Notts, for August. —Mean temperature of month, 
63 2°. Maximum on the 18th, 88-7°; minimum on the 6th, 41-3’. 
Maximum in the sun on the 8th, 135-1° ; minimum on the grass on the 
28th, 32-8°. Mean temperature of air at 9 A.M. 65-8°. Mean tempera¬ 
ture of soil 1 foot deep, 62-2°. Sunshine, total duration, 199 hours, 
or 44 per cent, of possible duration. We had no sunless days. Total 
rainfall, 1 34 inch. Rain fell on thirteen days. Average velocity of 
wind, 7'6 miles per hour ; velocity exceeded 400 miles on two 
days, and fell short of 100 miles on twelve days. Approximate 
averages for August:—Mean temperature, 59-7° ; sunshine, 149 hours ; 
rainfall, 2-36 inches. Very fine and warm month. The mean tempera¬ 
ture is higher than in any of the previous seventeen years, and the 
maximum is higher than in any month since 1876. Of the previous 
Augusts only 1883 had less rain, and of the previous twelve only 1884 
had more sunshine.—J. Mallender. 
- Pinks on the Riviera. —From time immemorial perpetual- 
flowering Pinks have been grown on the Riviera, as they are in Italy, 
and especially in Spain; but until the last twenty years they were only 
considered as household favourites, kept in pots on window-sills or in 
small gardens. Since the fast trains have been established, which carry 
the Riviera flowers to Paris in twenty hours and to London in less than 
two days, the cultivation of Pinks, both in the open air and under glass* 
has, according to M. de Vilmorin in a paper read at a meeting of the 
Royal Horticultural Society some time ago, made a wonderful progress. 
Acres and acres are now devoted to the growth of Pinks about Toulon, 
Hyeres, Cannes, Antibes, Nice, and Beaulieu. Hundreds of glass houses, 
or temporary structures simply made of two rows of glass frames 
supported by wooden rails, give to the best class of winter-flowering 
Pinks the help of some additional heat and of some useful shelter. But 
acres upon acres are grown without any glass at all, straw mats or 
canvas screens only being used to protect the plants from the effects of 
radiation, and to afford them the necessary protection against the bad 
effect of rain or cold dew. 
- Curiosities in Classing and Judging.—I do not know 
whether a very useful book could be written on this subject, but at least 
a very amusing, as well as suggestive, one could. I have to thank an 
exhibitor for troubling my mind with the topic, but it seems all the 
same to have some attractions. At the recent Agricultural Hall Show 
there was a class for a collection of Sunflowers, “ annual and perennial.” 
Note the imperative conjunction 1 Continuing, the schedule said, 
(“ Helianthus, Helenium, Harpalium, and Heliopsis only), to which 
Rudbeckias may be added.” Did this addition present itself as a sort 
of afterthought to the framers, and is thus added? Even if it were, 
why not have included Rudbeckias into the select sorts in the paren¬ 
thesis ? But the real fun of the thing lies in the employment of the 
word “ only ” after Heliopsis, and then Rudbeckias are added. What a 
bull. So much for the class, now as to the judging. An exhibitor 
asked me how I should interpret the requirement in the schedule 
“ annual and perennial,” and I said as an imperative requirement that 
both sections must be included. But the Judges actually, of the three 
collections staged, placed first one—admittedly a most beautiful one—that 
did not contain a single annual variety, whilst the second and third both 
fully complied with the requirements. We need a court of revision for 
prize schedules, and a court of appeal from improper judgments.—D. 
- Wild Flower Competitions. —May I be allowed to endorse 
Mr. Alex. Dean’s remarks (page 173) on this subject ? I always con¬ 
sider it one of the most unsatisfactory classes in country shows. In 
many places we get over fifty entries for a bouquet of wild flowers. 
Now, I take it this idea of making a bouquet or bunch is intended to 
teach the children how to gather and arrange their flowers tastefully. I 
should like to knovv in how many cases this laudable object is attained. 
I venture to suggest about 5 per cent., the remainder are arranged by 
their parents, and very often by a gardening friend. This is successfully 
defeating the object in view. I often feel very sore on this point when 
judging, for I see all the prizes going to bouquets that have not been 
made by the children. I think a little reformation in this matter 
should be made by the majority of committees when arranging their 
schedule for the next exhibition. It is a matter that can be 
readily remedied. I am acquainted with one village where they 
have a very good method of arranging this matter. A rule is inserted 
in the schedule stating that the children’s bouquets are to be arranged 
at the place of exhibition, under the supervision of a committee¬ 
man. Each child is allotted a space on the table, where there is- 
ample room to work. Although only a village, I saw eighty of these 
little workers busily engaged on the morning of the show, the gentle¬ 
man in charge of them sitting on the end of the table. I do not suggest 
this is the best method of securing a good display, for many of the 
bunches came out of the ordeal in a very primitive manner, while 
others clearly indicated they had been practising their work some time 
previously. At all events, the object of educating the children was 
attained. I cannot say my experience of committees is precisely the 
same as Mr. Dean’s,for I know one place where ten first, ten second, and 
ten third prizes are awarded, making thirty in all; at another show the 
judges were told to place plenty of extra prizes on the children’s exhibits. 
At a small village show, where the bouquets were somewhat numerous and 
the secretary the local squire, the judges were told to give prizes to all 
that were worth them. It is very rare one finds a class for a collection 
of wild flowers. Where such a class is given it should certainly be 
stipulated, and extra points would be allowed for the correct names of 
the plants staged.— JAS. B. Riding. 
CANKER IN PEAR TREES AS CAUSED BY MITES. 
“ M. Scheuten’s account of his observations [of the Pear-leaf gall 
mite] was published in Wiegman’s ‘Archiv’ for 1857, and translated 
into our own ‘ Annals and Magazine of Natural History ’ in the same 
year. The leaves of the Pear trees in his garden were attacked by black 
pustular inflated spots, under the epidermis of which he found the 
species of Phytoptus which he named Typhlodromus pyri. On 
examining a large number of spotted leaves in his garden, in which all 
the Pear trees were similarly attacked (one tree having a third of its 
leaves affected), he always found the same four-footed larvm in the 
interior of the leaves, and, in most cases, on the exterior a species of 
eight-legged mite, which he took to be the perfect form of the 
Phytoptus. He gives figures of these, and from them it is plain that 
the so-called larva is a Phytoptus, and the supposed perfect form a 
Gamasus. These are here shown.”—(“ Murray’s Economic Entomology^ 
Aptera,” pages 340 and 341.) 
Mr. Murray proceeds to discuss all the evidence for and against 
M. A. Scheuten’s observations, and, reasoning from analogy, arrives at 
the conclusion that Pbytoptidse (gall mites) are invariably four-footed, 
and this has been accepted as authoritative by subsequent writers. But 
some leave a loop-hole—say, “ the Phytopti, or gall mites, so far as 
known, have never more than two pairs of very short legs on the lower 
surface of the body in front.” This is conclusive that little is known of 
the life history of gall mites from experience, except an occasional and 
distant observation. Such are practically worthless, for to prove any¬ 
thing the observations must be frequent and consecutive, embracing the 
annual cycle. From a cultural point of view this begins in spring or 
early summer, and as a gardener I prefer to commence a description of 
the Pear-leaf gall mite (Phytoptus pyri) from that time. 
The mite lives on the small yellow shining young leaves, and causes 
red swollen places on the upper surface, which later on become dark 
red, and ultimately black. This is a common affection on the leaves of 
the Pear tree in this country, usually commencing at the end of May 
or early in June, but this year the attack began a month earlier. The 
spots are oval in form and of different sizes (A, fig. 32), a leaf natural 
size. On the under side of the leaf the spots are round at first, with a small 
depressed dot in the centre. This is shown in B, the under side of the 
leaf, natural size. Very often the blisters are close and run together, 
and are so numerous as to cover almost the whole surface. This, as 
almost every leaf on the tree may be attacked, greatly weakens the 
trees, and renders them unprofitable. 
If a section be made through a gall, and it is examined with a lens, 
the cells in the middle of the leaf are seen, as at C, to be torn asunder, and 
in the middle of the blister, on its lower surface, is a small opening (a). 
This shows the condition of the gall while red, and there is neither 
erineum (hairs) nor mites or eggs in the interior or at its mouth, but 
the leaf hairs stand out from the leaf surface beyond the scope of the 
magnifying power for measurement. Not a mite is to be found on the 
affected leaf. Such is the state of affairs up to mid-July on the leaves 
first attacked, as well as those recently and still red. Where are the 
mites ? Perhaps the answer may be found in the fact that while I was 
looking at some infested leaves overtopping a wood fence the owner of 
the garden suggested that the rain had washed them all away 1 
But the infection spreads from leaf to leaf, and shoot to shoot. 
Summer pruning is of no use in getting rid of mites, for they pass from 
the leaves first assailed to those of the young shoots springing from the 
axils of the attacked leaves. One such shoot is represented in D, the 
leaves being conspicuous by the bright red galls, and the central leaves 
