90 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAQE GARDENER. 
[ February 2, 1893. 
intensely amused at the virtuous claims put forward by some. One 
writer, with most refreshing naivete, suggests that those who advocate 
the e irly date have only thoughts of their own Roses, evidently assuming 
that the dear innocents who favour the later date were no way influenced 
by such motives. And yet one could not help smiling, for did we not 
know that the gravamen of some of the doughtiest champions was that 
only flowers from cut-backs could be shown, their maidens not being in, 
and all the while thinking of them they were humming to themselves 
“ The Girls I Left Behind Me.” Again, some of these advocates of a 
later date are very susceptible about the dear northern growers, but I 
think we may well ask who they are? Since the retirement of Mr. 
Whitwell and Mr. T. B. Hall we have no amateur grower of the first class 
in the North, and very few of any class. We have in the Midlands a few, 
but they have yet to make their mark. It is the same with regard to 
professionals. Setting aside Messrs. Harkness and Mack, the latter a very 
rare exhibitor, we have none, and Messrs. Harkness having now taken 
some land at Hitchin may be almost regarded as southern growers. Nor 
do I find that the susceptibilities of the northern growers are much taken 
into account at the provincial Exhibition, for since Mr. Hall’s days the 
Jubilee trophy and most of the principal prizes have gone to Essex, 
Somersetshire, Gloucestershire, Hertfordshire, &c., so that it is raising 
a false issue to put forward the northern growers as a reason for altering 
the date of the Metropolitan Show. Mr. Grahame has put the matter 
clearly, and I think that these additional facts ought to have some 
weight. 
The same airy indifference with regard to the real circumstances of 
'the case pervades the statements of those who find fault with the 
judging, and suggest methods for its improvement. Do the writers quite 
understand how it is t In the first place, then, look at the time. Even 
if the exhibitors kept their time we should have but an hour. The 
space is cleared, or ought to be cleared, for the judges at eleven o’clock, 
-and at twelve o’clock the holders of private view tickets and the season 
ticket holders of the Crystal Palace are clamouring for admission, and 
must be admitted ; hence it is impossible but that there must be, in 
some instances, hasty judgments. I do not say that they are therefore 
wrong, but they are hasty. Then, again, do exhibitors understand that 
there are upwards of sixty judges required, and I think it will not be 
speaking too severely to say that there must be some inexperienced ones 
amongst them. The notion, then, put forward by some writers with 
regard to the medal Roses that they should be judged after the other 
classes are judged is deliciously absurd. The driving of six omnibuses 
abreast through Temple Bar would be child’s play to such an attempt 
a* this. I have been more than once called very hard names because 
I would not prevent the visitors after twelve o’clock from putting 
their unwelcome presence amongst the judges. And while writing 
on this subject I would emphasise most strongly what I cannot but 
think must be called the inconsiderate conduct of some of those 
who are selected for the office of judge; they accept it and then 
never turn up. No one but the unfortunate Secretary can have any 
conception of the amount of confusion and trouble that this occa¬ 
sions, and the disorganisation occasioned by it is one of the most 
fruitful sources of complaint. I most sincerely hope that all who accept 
this post in the present year will not allow anything to interfere with 
the fulfilment of their engagements. When especially this takes place 
in the higher classes, where the judges have been most carefully selected, 
the confusion that this creates has not reference only to the class from 
which the judge has dropped out, but in others from whence one has to 
be taken to supply his place. 
The subject of voting by proxy is one with which I confess I have 
no sympathy. It has been abolished in our highest legislative assembly, 
it is not used in any public body that I am aware of; it is true it is 
adopted in railway companies, but that is of an entirely different 
character. The questions to be submitted to the annual meeting may be 
■taken in various aspects, and so may the reasoniags of those who take 
part in the meeting. I remember once being with a friend who was to 
.preach for a special object at a church in Sussex, but before the sermon 
was preached the collection was to be made. Never shall I forget the 
indignant scorn with which my friend, who was an Irishman, replied 
to the churchwarden; “And do you mean to tell me that, no matter 
how eloquent I may be, it will make no difference in the collection ? ” 
I need hardly say it damped his appeal, so if members send their proxies 
it would imply that their minds were made up, and that no force of 
argument would in the least degree affect the decision ; thus it would 
entirely destroy the character of our meetings, on which we have been 
so often complimented. However strongly members may feel, they 
speak with forbearance, and I have never seen anyone lose their temper 
except once. Then it brings rosarians together, and this is a great 
gain. 
With regard to dates for shows, it should be remarked that taking 
the challenge trophies as a test in the ten years, from 1881 to 1891, the 
amateurs’ trophy has once been taken by a northern grower, Mr. 
Whitwell, and the nurserymen’s twice by 'Messrs. Harkness & Sons • 
while the Jubilee trophy, which it was certainly hoped would be taken 
by northern growers, has twice out of the four times been taken by Mr. 
Pemberton, and the nurserymen’s twice by Mr. F. Cant. These facts 
I think sufficiently prove that it is impossible so to fix dates as will 
meet both north and south alike, and that the fairest way is to consider 
the southern growers in the metropolitan shows, and the northern and 
midland growers in the provincial shows. It is the same in other 
societies. It was impossible to fix a date for Auriculas that would suit 
both northern and southern growers, so there was a separate date fixed for 
each. I have often heard my friend Mr. T. B. Hall say that the best 
Roses he exhibited during the season were those set up at the Liverpool 
Show towards the end of Auaust, and I feel assured that there are so many 
things that influence the Rose — soil, situation, the stocks used, and 
the character of the season, that it will be always impossible to fix a 
date that will satisfy all, and that taking all this into consideration we 
can hardly improve on the present fixtures.—D., Deal. 
P.S,—I wish it to be distinctly understood that in the foregoing 
observations I do not write in my official capacity, but simply as a 
member of the N.R.S. 
National Rose Society.—Judging. 
In reply to “ W. R. Raillem’s” remarks (page 70) on judging I would 
like to explain my meaning. I have no doubt “W. R. Raillem” will more 
readily agree with what I now say, but I thought that my former 
remarks would be understood, although not expressed to the fullest 
extent. There are many of our largest amateur growers who also 
exhibit, but the work of observation is done by their gardeners. Many 
of these gentlemen are rosarians by courtesy, but not so in reality; 
and “ of such” are the large growers I referred to 1 I abide by my 
previously expressed views, that a small grower—a person, for instance, 
who grows 100 exhibition varieties, say six of some and as many as 
eighteen of others, and who, taking account all round, is a grower 
of about 1000 or 1500 Roses, who has these Roses well within view ; 
who also has the plants so arranged that some have cool positions and 
others warm early corners, &c ; such a rosarian, by knowing the habits 
of Roses grown in various positions, by seeing other persons’ exhibits, 
and by being a man or woman of observation (I have a very high 
opinion of the discrimination of ladies in Rose culture and exhibiting) 
can be a judge of the very highest class. After all how many varieties 
are constantly shown / I venture to say not nearly 100 ; no, not even 
60 varieties. Of course, in the seventy-two champion nurserymen’s class 
there may be some half a dozen Roses not frequently seen, but they 
are not the blooms on which the result of the championship usually 
will turn. 
I cannot see what the question of the soil of the gardens the Roses 
come from has to say to the value of the Roses set up—you judge the 
Roses, not the soil, and the same applies to the moss. I do not think a 
judge should give a single point to the moss; he is placed as a judge 
over Roses, not moss, and he should judge the flowers individually as 
well as collectively; if they be superior to their opponents in quality, 
and the setting up in no way infringes any rule of our Society, then 
they should be awarded the first place, and I am sure that our judges 
do make their awards on this basis. I also think that any doubt of 
such fairness on our part as judges would deter new members from 
exhibiting, especially as young rosarians must be only too conscious of 
their shortcomings in setting up and other details only mastered by 
constant practice. I shall defer the discussion of the Metropolitan 
Show to the autumn, I should like to say to the Greek Kalends. 
—Charles J. Grahame. 
P.S.—In connection with my assertion of the number of varieties 
most frequently shown at exhibitions, I would refer your readers to 
Mr. Mawley’s article on this subject published in the Journal some 
months ago.—C. J. G. 
Proxy Voting, 
I DO not quite follow “ K.” (page 70) in his remarks upon this question. 
Of course it is more satisfactory to vote in person, but we contend that 
it is better to vote by proxy than at a heavy cost of time, money, and 
trouble, which in these days too often means not voting at all, I and 
others have “ pegged away,” but the expense and sacrifice of time have 
been, as I expected, too great for all but a few. Besides, the distant 
members think they have not their share of privileges in other respects, 
and so they are scanty in number and lukewarm, not hearty and united 
enough to make their voice heard as a strong body. They know that 
they would be “at a disadvantage” even in voting by proxy, but they 
are strongly of opinion that they are at a worse disadvantage as at 
present situated. 
In money alone it costs a large average of the distant members as 
much as their yearly subscription to attend and vote ; why should they 
be charged twice as much as the metropolitan members for the privilege 
of voting, when they will still be at a disadvantage in matters of climate 
and date? I am sure the N.R.S. should for its own sake justify its title 
by endeavouring to show equal justice to the members at a distance. 
—W. R. Raillem. 
The Date for the “Rose Derby,” 
As prominently connected with the question of the date of the 
Metropolitan Exhibition of the National Rose Society, now being so 
vigorously discussed in the gardening papers, may I be permitted to offer 
a few remarks and a friendly criticism ? 
We must not individualise. It is not a question of what date suits 
Smith, Jones, or Robinson. We must take a broader view tlian this. 
The case for the later date rests principally on these grounds. 1, The 
Society claims to be “ National.” 2, The Metropolitan Show is the 
“ Rose Derby ” of the year. 3, The “ Rose Derby ” should be held at the 
height of the Rose season of all England, not a small part of it, for the 
Society is “National.” 4, The “Rose Derby” this year is fixed for 
July lat. 5, Can either July 1st, 2nd, or 3rd be considered the height 
of the Rose season ? 
If the most popular dates, if the dates on which there is the greatest 
clashing of Rose shows be any criterion as to the height of the Rose 
