240 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ Marsh i3, 1893. 
Floral Committee of the N.C.S, 
I have just (March 16th) received your issue of to-day, whereia 
nppear certain letters referring to the late election of Chairman to the 
Floral Committee of the National Chrysanthemum Society. I can assure 
your correspondents, anonymous and otherwise, that I have in no way 
sought the office either of Chairman or member of the Committee in 
question, nor can I permit my name to be connected with the contests 
which have during the last two months been occupying your pages. 
1 had been urged to accept the decision of the General Committee 
electing me to the office of Chairman on the assurance that, as one 
entirely unconnected with the late disputes, I might be instrumental in 
guiding the Committee into less troubled waters than it has enjoyed of 
late. 
It is a fact that the majority was a narrow one, but two names only 
being before the meeting, it did not occur to me that it would be less 
proper, or more difficult, for the holder of the majority, however small, 
to accept the result of the election, than for the gentleman owning a 
minority of a similar extent. However, I now learn for the first time 
that a formal canvass was made on my behalf under the circumstances 
stated by your correspondents, aud it is alleged that such canvass placed 
Mr. Gordon at a disadvantage ; the suggestion of course being that the 
twenty votes recorded for that gentleman were due to no prior effort or 
understanding, a suggestion which I at once accept. 
Without in any way imputing blame to Mr. Dean, who doubtless 
considered himself fully at liberty to act as a member, as well as 
Secretary of the Society, I may at once say that I could not, had I been 
aware of the intention, have authorised such a canvass on my behalf. 
In saying this I must add that I fully believe that the only object Mr. 
Dean had in view was to secure a chairman absolutely ( issevered from 
the unfortunate issues which have lately been raised in connection with 
the Floral Committee, with reference to which Mr. Dean has neither 
sought, nor can he know, my views. 
In the circumstances, willing as I am to assist the Society by any 
means within my power, I cannot consent—as I have to-day intimated to 
the Secretary—to accept either the office of Chairman or member of the 
Floral Committee under conditions which might, even by the remotest 
appearance, lead to the suggestion of partisanship, and certainly not at 
the cost of being drawn into the miserable squabbles into which the 
“ Wells” and “ Godfrey” cases have degenerated, and of which, I would 
venture to suggest, many of your readers are beginning to be somewhat 
tired.— Chas. E. Shea. 
[While we have left our correspondents to record their opinions as 
freely on one side as the other on debateable matters of distinctly public 
interest, we feel it incumbent in this latest development to say that in 
our opinion no other step was open to a high-minded gentleman than 
that taken by Mr. Shea. We do not gather from letters which have 
been sent to us that Mr. Shea is regarded as other than admirably 
fitted for the position to which he was elected, but the extra official 
action taken in a moment of over-zeal on his behalf is strongly objected 
to. Mr. Shea, as an amateur and country gentleman, had in those 
respects, coupled with business aptitude and a judicial mind, strong 
claims to be considered a “ fit and proper person” for the position from 
which he retires, and we are convinced that by no one would his election 
have been more cordially accepted than by Mr. George Gordon had no 
private action from an unexpected source been taken against him. 
Mr. Gordon, by a long and honourable career in the Chrysanthemum 
world, has many friends. It is only natural that they should wish to see 
his services recognised, aud hence his nomination for the vacancy which 
he was so well qualified to fill. Neither he nor Mr. Shea sought the 
position, but both very properly acquiesced in the desire of a considerable 
number of members to stand for election, and it could not have entered 
the mind of either that any private influence on the part of an official 
could have been brought to bear in favour of one as against the other. 
No matter how good the motive that impelled to this action, it was 
not the less unfortunate, and bound, as might have been foreseen, to 
lead to “squabbles.” These cannot possibly add dignity to any society, 
and must eventually affect its prosperity. Causes for dissension should 
therefore not be created, and on those who create them by errors in 
judgment must rest the responsibility. We shall be glad if it can be 
arranged for a chairman of committee to be elected without a contest, 
and we should much like to see all causes of strife removed. 
We did not know that Mr. Gordon was associated with the “ un¬ 
fortunate issues,” nor do we think the best way of ending existing 
differences is by public references to them. These invite replies, and 
we know that important members of the N.C.S. feel that the “Godfrey” 
case hag not been frankly dealt with on its merits.] 
National Chrysanthemum Society. 
Allow me to tell Mr. Godfrey he misquotes me (page 222), which is 
surely not his “ principle,” and if he refers to what 1 wrote he will see 
his mistake, which I need not further refer to ; only 1 may tell him that 
someone has sent me three copies cf the letter that has often been alluded 
to, and I do not admire the courage displayed in the case. 
Now, Mr. Dean has opened himself by replying to a few of the many 
who wish to guide him in working the N.C.S., 1 trust soon to hear he 
has got all raisers and growers of seedling Chrysanthemums who are on 
the Floral Committee to retire, as such are out of place there. If say 
two judges who are not Floral Committeemen, and one or two Floral 
Committeemen who are not raisers or growers of seedlings, be appointed 
to adjudicate on seedlings brought to shows, not meetings, then exhibitors 
would have confidence in the Society and bring their seedlings in such 
numbers as would make a brave show in themselves, seeing how many 
growers are now raising new varieties. 
I see new Chrysanthemums are exhibited in a cut state. I should 
say this is wrong, as we want Chrysanthemums dwarfed and with 
stronger flower stems. If exhibited on plants as well judges could give 
points to such as have strong flower stems and are dwarfer than are 
some which we now have.— Jas. Hamilton, Byrltley, Burton-on- 
Trent. 
Judging Cut Blooms by Comparison. 
Comparisons are odious to “Sadoc,” evidently, for at page 180 he 
condemns this practice with several others. Is not all judging a question 
of comparisons, and do not the points given mean the measuring of the 
distance between such? I have tried what “ Sadoc” thinks is the proper 
way of judging, but must own I do not feel quite satisfied with it, and 
have seen other good judges puzzled at the result of the totals in points. 
I believe that the nearer you can get two objects together the easier 
it is to detect the difference between them. We all know what it is 
to go first to one garden and then another to see who has the best Grapes 
and flowers, and then how faulty our judgments have been when we see 
the produce side by side on the exhibition table. 
Would “ Sadoc,” in judging for the best bloom in any show, be con¬ 
tent to give the award to a flower in any stand that had gained the 
highest number of points, say six ? Would he not lift out what he 
thought the best bloom and carry it round with him to all others that 
had gained six points, and compare them to see if it should be the 
premier bloom ? If this is the best test for single blooms it must apply 
to a stand of twelve or twenty-four blooms. To find the best, say of any 
two Stan s very near, I would remove the one to the other. This is 
easily done by bringing a board of twelve blooms and having it held by 
anyone; then we will start with the left hand flower in the back row, 
working towards the front, not searching for flowers of the same variety, 
although the same two varieties will be often found placed in the same 
places in different stands, such as Etoile de Lyon and Viviand Morel, for 
exhibitors know the best places to put the telling flowers. On the same 
principle of judging for the premier bloom in a show one variety is 
pitted against the other, so are these flowers taken. 
Judges who have been growers have the advantage of knowing what 
varieties are difficult to produce good form. Stand A and B are then 
inspected, one flower at a time, and the distance of the one above its 
rival is noted down in points. If they are considered equal neither 
scores at the finish, and the two stands should be left together till the 
next stand of twelve blooms is compared, then before separating them 
give a point for colour and freshness, wffiich is easily determined when 
the stands are side by side. I do not say that “Sadoc’s” way is wrong, 
having tried it with others ; but it means trusting to his mind’s eye to 
carry size, colour of say twenty-four or forty-eight blooms to a distance, 
and in my opinion the surest method is having the two objects side by 
side if possible, and I am not alone in preferring this way to the other 
when stands are close in merit.— John Lambert, Poivis Castle 
Gardens, 
Grafting Chrysanthemums on Anthemis frutescens. 
Mons. J. Everaerts writes from Antwerp: “I send you the 
January number of the ‘ Revue de THorticulture Beige,’ thinking that 
the article on grafting Chrysanthemums on Anthemis frutescens might 
interest you, and perhaps some of the readers of your Journal. We 
have ourselves tried the experiment, and thus far have a hopeful 
opinion about the future of the new method.” We are much obliged 
to M. Everaerts for drawing attention to the article, which is by 
M. Alexis Callier, and is of much interest. Many readers may be glad 
to know what the Belgian horticulturists are doing with Anthemis 
(Chrysanthemum) frutescens as a stock for Chrysanthemums, and we 
therefore translate the article. 
“ The ‘ Revue ’ asks me for some information on the subject of 
grafting Chrysanthemums on the Anthemis. I have nothing to say 
as to the results obtained. Some grafted plants were seen at the 
November Exhibition in Ghent. They were, however, only the results 
of one trial, and I am convinced that they may be greatly improved 
upon. I have been asked how I discovered the new method. It is very 
simple, I did not find it, and it is not new. I have imitated the Chinese, 
who use it readily, as witnessed by Fortune, reported by Burbidge (T/te 
Chrysanthemum'). 
“ The idea came to me to follow their example in observing the 
great vigour developed by certain Anthemis under the influence of 
manure. The Anthemis being hardy, or, at least, conserving its trunks 
and stems, the Chrysanthemum ought to profit, by means of the graft, 
by the superabundance of sap in the stock, and above all of the strength 
already acquired by the latter when the shoots of the Chrysanthemum 
have only just commenced to push. This strength might represent the 
work of weeks, mouths, or even years. In two years the Anthemis, 
