March 30, 1893. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
247 
frequently shown in the second five than during the first five years. 
William Rawlings, for example, gives an average of eighteen for 
the first half of the period, and of twenty-six for the second half. 
Then, again, there are some kinds like Ethel Britton which show 
no decided indication either of advance or decline during the ten 
years. The above examples will sufficiently indicate how unfair it 
would be with these facts before me to treat all the varieties, as 
has hitherto been done, precisely alike. The averages have again 
been so calculated that the varying extent of the exhibitions does 
not in any way interfere with the comparable character of the 
results. 
T he Exhibition held at the Crystal Palace in September last 
by the National Dahlia Society proved in many respects 
one of unusual interest, while all sections were well represented. 
The number of Show Dahlias fell somewhat short of the average ; 
but the Fancies were more numerous than in any of the four 
previous years. The show of Pompons was also larger than 
at any of the recent exhibitions. The advance made by the 
Cactus and Decorative varieties during the last few years is 
truly surprising. In 1889 only seventy-four sets of blooms of 
these were staged, whereas at last year’s Show there were 209, 
or nearly three times as many. The Singles also now add greatly 
to the interest of the display, and year by year are shown in 
larger numbers. 
In the short statement which follows is given the total number 
of Show and Fancy Dahlias staged in competition at ten Crystal 
Palace Exhibitions, also the number of Pompon, Cactus, and 
Single Dahlias at the last four of them. 
1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 
Shows ... 692 754 837 840 
Fancies ... 269 425 355 387 
Pompons — — — — 
Cactus and \ _ _ _ _ 
Decorative j 
Singles ... — — — — 
1106 1158 922 934 854 879 
350 315 274 283 286 340 
— — 147 214 193 267 
— — 74 156 158 209 
— — 50 95 124 138 
Of the seventy Show and Fancy Dahlias which secured places in 
the tables for 1883 only forty are to be found anywhere in the 
present lists. Moreover, no fewer than forty varieties are now 
tabulated in the analysis which were not even in existence when 
the first one appeared in 1883. Yery considerable progress in the 
improvement of the Dahlias in both sections must, therefore, have 
been made during the decade under review. 
In the table of Show Dahlias, Mrs. Gladstone (No. 1) for the 
seventh year in succession takes the premier place, and there is as 
yet no indication of its claim to that proud position being seriously 
contested. Of other established varieties, Mrs. Langtry (No. 6) ; 
Shirley Hibberd (No. 15) ; and Harrison Weir (No. 17) have 
seldom, if ever, been as numerously represented as at last year’s 
exhibition. On the other hand, Henry Walton, Hon. Mrs. P. 
Wyndham, Prince Bismarck, Goldfinder, Mrs. Harris, and other 
good Show kinds were staged much less frequently than usual. 
Of the 1889 varieties on the list Maud Fellowes (No. 10) and 
W. Jackson (No. 48) have made no advance on the positions 
they previously occupied. Glowworm (No. 42), however, was 
unusually well shown at the last Exhibition. There are four 
kinds introduced in 1890—John Hickling (No. 30), Alice Emily, 
and Duke of Fife (No. 34), and Crimson Globe (No. 46). John 
Walker, only distributed in 1892, on its first appearance takes a 
remarkably promising position at No. 13 ; while Arthur Rawlings 
of the same year will be found already as high as No. 30, and 
Arthur Ocock at No. 39. 
It might be thought that the longer the period over which an 
investigation of this kind extended the more reliable would be 
the averages obtained for the different varieties, and consequently 
the more satisfactory the relative positions assigned them in the 
tables. This would undoubtedly be the case but for the frequent 
introduction of new kinds, for the most promising of which places 
have also to be provided. In this way the older varieties either 
become gradually elbowed out of the lists altogether, or have to 
take in most cases inferior positions. When I had only the results 
of a few years before me these downward movements were not so 
apparent, but now that I have tables giving the exact numerical 
values for all the older Show and Fancy Dahlias for each of 
the last ten exhibitions, and those for the newer kinds since the 
time of their first introduction, the effects of these changes is at 
once seen. 
In order to give each variety the position it is at the present 
time entitled to occupy, and the tables a more practical value, I 
have this year recalculated all the averages. Some few of the 
older sorts have an average given them for the full ten years, 
others for nine, eight, seven, six, and even five years as the case 
may be. In fact, the claims of each variety, whether new or old, 
have been decided entirely on its merits. Take, for instance, the 
Hon. Mrs. P. Wyndham, for some years the premier show flower, 
in the first half of the past decade, was shown on an average 
twenty-four times, but in the latter half only thirteen times. I 
could easily multiply examples of this kind, as there are compara¬ 
tively few Dahlias which in the course of ten years do not show 
some signs of decline in public favour. On the other hand, 
varieties are occasionally to be met with which have been more 
No. 666.—VoL. XXVI., Thied Sbkiks. 
Turning now to the Fancies, we still find Mrs. Saunders and 
Rev. J. B. M. Camm, both first sent out about twenty years ago, 
heading the list. They were in excellent form at the last Show, 
as were also Duchess of Albany, Frank Pearce, and H. Glasscock, 
Gaiety, on the contrary, has only once before been as poorly 
staged : while Mrs. N. Halls, Flora Wyatt, George Barnes, and 
Rebecca have also seldom been as badly represented. 
The two 1889 Fancies, Mrs. J. Downie (No. 4) and Matthew 
Campbell (No. 5), well maintain the excellent places they secured 
in the last analysis. T. W. Girdlestone (No. 9), distributed in 
1890, has greatly improved on its last year’s position. Of the new 
sorts sent out in 1891 and 1892 Comedian (No. 23) and Mrs. 
Ocock (No. 23) were both creditably shown considering the recent 
dates of their introduction. 
The following short lists have this year been arranged on similar 
lines to those drawn up for the Show and Fancy Dahlias, otherwise 
many of the best new sorts would have been excluded from them. 
The Pompon varieties readily lend themselves to tabulation, but 
neither the Cactus nor the Single kinds are as yet sufficiently 
established to allow of this being satisfactorily done. The gradual 
separation of the more or less true Cactus from the Decorative 
varieties by the National Society has been a step in the right 
direction, and has already borne good fruit in the introduction 
during the last few years of good new sorts of the true Cactus 
type, while several valuable additions to this popular section 
are, I understand, shortly to be sent out, Indeed, one of the 
most interesting features of last year’s exhibition was the fine 
display of new Cactus Dahlias recently raised by Messrs. Keynes» 
Williams & Co. • 
No. 2322.— VoL. LXXXVIIL, Old Series 
