44 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ January 19, 1893. 
Laelia anceps. Calanthe Veitchi and C. vestita do in rooms as well 
as any other plant. 
Flowers for cutting include a variety of Chrysanthemums, such 
as Mary Anderson, Golden Star, both singles. Source d’Or, 
Avalanche, Princess Teck, Miss Annie Lowe, Lady Margaret, 
Massalia, Elaine, Ethel, and Mr. Jones. Perfectly fresh flowers 
only should be cut for furnishing vases in room decoration. 
Zonal Pelargoniums, Lily of the Valley, Tulips, Roman Hyacinths, 
Bouvardias red and white, Chinese Primulas, Cyclamens, Mar¬ 
guerites, Callas, with Croton and Dracaena leaves, are among the 
chief things for cutting at present. 
The fashion for table decoration has come round to mueh 
simplicity, and that allows for a good deal being effected with the 
outlay of a very little material. A few dozens of Chrysanthemums 
are sufficient for a very large table. As the blooms are now below 
the medium size these are best arranged in small glasses or silver 
vases. A very pretty arrangement is secured with white and pink 
Primulas laid on the cloth, at the same time employing a few good 
leaves of the same plants. Another method of arrangement may 
he effectively employed, all the material coming from out of doors. 
Long sprays of one or other of the fine-leaved Ivies, with Rose 
heps, bracken Fern of various shades of brown, the common 
Polypody and berries of the Strawberry Trees, combine to furnish 
a charming arrangement. Where Orchids are plentiful a few of 
these laid on the cloth, in combination with Croton shoots of the 
angustifolium type, and Smilax produce a very rich effect ; plants 
of Crotons should be employed at same time. As a rule the one 
thing to guard against is the using of too much material. A very 
few good flowers are much to be preferred to lumpy masses.—B. 
NATIONAL GARDENING SOCIETIES. 
Those who are interested in the controversy now appearing in 
these pages regarding the doings of the National Chrysanthemum 
Society have doubtless had other thoughts arise in their minds. 
This, at least, has been the case with me. The whole question 
referring to the management of so-called “ national ” societies is both 
wide and deep, and affords much food for meditation. A. decade or 
so ago “ national ” gardening societies could have been counted on 
the fingers of one hand without difficulty, and therefore they did 
not give rise to much thought. Now, however, matters are changed. 
At the present time there are at least eight societies, affecting 
horticulture in various phases, that sail under “ national ” colours”. 
Many of those, too, have assumed such gigantic proportions, and 
influence gardening in a more or less degree, that one might well 
consider the legitimateness of using the term “ national.” In some 
respects it is gratifying to know that national societies have grown 
so rapidly, inasmuch as it augurs well for the future of horticul¬ 
ture ; but the various organisations should not in their days of 
success forget the original objects they had in view. I say original 
advisedly, because it seems to me, as it might do to others, that 
some of the societies are inclined to drift away from the purpose 
for which they were instituted. In other words, do they fulfil 
the requirements of all their members, and prove themselves truly 
“ national ? ” 
Obviously this is the view in which many country members 
regard the National Chrysanthemum Society. Here we have a 
Society that has had an unchecked career, and, if we except the 
srnall cloud that recently appeared on the horizon, all connected 
with it have been satisfied. There are upwards of 700 members 
on the books, and ninety-four affiliated societies in all parts of the 
country, so from a numerical point of view none can deny its 
legitimate right to be termed national. But on considering other 
matters one cannot be surprised at a little disaffection among 
country members. These pay their annual subscriptions. What 
do they get in return ? Probably a schedule and a pass to the 
Exhibitions. They should in addition at least have a voice in the 
management of the Society. The by-laws and regulations affect 
hundreds of exhibitors in different parts of the country, and there¬ 
fore it is only right that they should be considered. I am alive 
to the difficulty in regard to country members. As has been 
notified in the Journal of Horticulture^ and as Mr. E C. Jukes 
pointed out at the annual dinner, and since in these pages, country 
members are cordially welcomed at the meetings. Affiliated 
societies, moreover, had a right to send representatives to the 
Committee meetings, and it is entirely their own fault if they do 
not enforce this privilege. So far so good ; but what about 
expense and time ? A remedy is undoubtedly needed. 
Passing on we come to the National Rose Society, which has 
had a spotless and most successful career. There are, according to 
the annual report printed in a recent issue, 527 members and 
thirty-six affiliated societies. In addition to these gratifying 
facts there is a substantial balance at the bankers. Matters 
could not, in this respect, be more satisfactory. But here comes 
the inevitable question, “Is it ‘national’?” At the annual 
general meeting held recently it was hinted that of the 527 members 
no less than 75 per cent, were southerners. This is astounding. 
A truly “ national ” society should have a more equal distribution 
of members. At the meeting alluded to the Rev. J. H. Pemberton 
strongly appealed to those present to consider the interests of the 
northern growers, and so make the Society national, but his 
proposition was rejected. He is unquestionably on the right 
track, and may he persist in his good intentions until the “ prize ” 
is won. Another item worth recording is, that a gentleman at the 
annual meeting expressed the opinion that were the National Rose 
Society to consider the interests of northern growers more there 
would be as many members in the north as there were now in the 
south. This should be borne in mind. 
Then there is the National Amateur Gardeners’ Association—a 
Society that has made great progress. Like many similar organisa¬ 
tions it started in a very humble way only two years ago : but it 
was planted on good soil, and has ffourished accordingly. There 
are now, I believe, upwards of 400 members on the books, a 
branch Association at Liverpool, and several affiliated societies, 
including one in Tasmania. These facts speak well for the 
Association, and affords ample proof that amateur gardeners when 
properly organised can form themselves into an influential body. 
The objects of this Association are to watch the interests of 
“amateurs,” the true definition of which is too frequently 
misconstrued. That this Institution was needed is exemplified by 
the rapid progress it has made, and it is gratifying to record that 
the Executive indirectly approached the Royal Horticultural 
Society in regard to the correct definition of “ amateur ” with 
satisfactory results. Besides those mentioned there are the 
National Auricula Society, the National Carnation Society, the 
National Dahlia Society, National Pink Society, the National 
Tulip Society, and so far as as I know there may be more that 
attach “ National ” to their titles—in some cases perhaps indis¬ 
criminately. 
Now comes the question as to the advisability of making neces¬ 
sary changes to admit of the term “ national ” being used in its 
proper sense. There are difficulties in the way, but if persisted in 
they can be overcome. The various societies desire the support of 
country members, and in return, I maintain, that the latter, as 
already said, have a right to assist in the conducting of the affairs 
of their respective “ national ” societies. How can this be brought 
about ? Admitting the fact that London is the centre of horticul¬ 
ture, it does not necessarily follow that the “ national ” societies 
should be conducted exclusively by members who reside in and 
near the metropolis. Indeed such a state of affairs is, in my 
opinion, most undesirable. At the general meeting of the National 
Rose Society the Rev. A. Foster Melliar made an attempt to avert 
this difficulty by making a proposition that country members be 
allowed to vote by proxy. But the metropolitan element proved 
too strong, and the proposition, admirable in its way, was rejected. 
The same idea should be persistently brought forward at all meet¬ 
ings of all so-called “ national ” societies until the country members 
obtain their rights and are placed on an equal footing with those 
“ near home.” Similar views may be advanced in regard to the 
exhibitions. A national society should endeavour to please the 
whole of its members, country and otherwise, by holding a 
“national” not a metropolitan or local exhibition. What would 
members of the Royal Agricultural Society say if their annual 
Exhibition was always held in London ? If this organisation can 
migrate, so to speak, with satisfactory results, could not a 
“ national ” horticultural society do similarly ? At all events this 
and other matters are worth considering, and the sooner it is done 
the better.— Observer. 
EDUCATION IN GARDENING. 
Silver Medal Essay. {Concluded from page 524.') 
Books to Consult. 
The subjects mentioned in this essay as being desirable of 
attention by the horticultural student necessarily require a supply 
of books dealing with the knowledge recommended to be acquired. 
As orthography was the first subject mentioned, it is necessary to 
indicate the best book to consult where aid is needed. For 
ordinary reference to correct deficiencies in spelling, “ Nuttali’s 
