V268 
’-J'OVRNAL' or HORTIOmmRE: AND rnTTAQR GARDENER. 
[ March. 3q, W8. 
Mr. Shea and Mr. Gordon. 
It ii not my intention to take any part in the discussion on the 
proceedings in connection with the recent election of the Chairman of 
Floral Committee of the National Chrysanthemum Society, but I must 
protest in the strongest possib'e manner against the implication 
running through Mr. Shea’s letter that I have been associated with the 
d.issen3ions and squabbles in the Society which have been discussed in 
your pages. I greatly regret that Mr. Shea should have thought proper 
to attempt to discredit me by inuendo, for which there has not been 
the slightest justification, or indeed anything that could be so construed. 
—George Gordon. 
Mr. Dean and the N.C.S. 
It is rumoured that Mr. Richard Dean is contemplating his resig¬ 
nation of the secretaryship of the N.C.S , because his indiscreet action 
on behalf of Mr. Shea’s election as Chairman of the Floral Committee 
has been disapproved by this gentleman. We have also heard that the 
alleged intention, if carried out, may lead to some withdrawals of 
members. If this occur the cause will be apparent. We are not alone in 
thinking that Mr. Dean’s mistake as a paid official in attempting to 
influence the election of Chairman in a private way would be small in 
comparison with the greater error he would commit by allowing himself 
to be the author of disruption. He is a very able man and an excellent 
Secretary when he confines himself to carrying out the wishes of a 
Committee which undoubtedly he did not do in the case referred to. 
The Society would, no doubt, survive his withdrawal, though it may not 
have made quite so much progress as his last Report implies. 
Possibly this last whip of the Secretary will be the means of putting 
things right, as it affects those who are on the Committee, and they will 
perhaps have a little sympathy for others. I think a National Society 
should certainly have a Secretary who will place all letters that are 
addressed to him for the Committee before that body; also one who will 
not send private letters to influence votes against any committeeman.— 
W. Wells, Earlsioood, 
The N.C.S. Committee versus Godfrey and Others. 
The thanks of Chrysanthemum growers are due to the Editor of the 
Journal of Horticulture for the fair and unprejudiced publicity he has 
given to the recent discreditable proceedings connected with the Com¬ 
mittee of N.C.S., and I fear Mr. Shea is in error when he suggests that 
readers are becoming tired of the discussion. At any rate, it is not the 
case with those with whom I have come in contact, and few will con¬ 
sider the case honourably settled till a more satisfactory explanation is 
forthcoming. The awarding of certificates to new varieties of Chrys¬ 
anthemums is of such importance to growers and exhibitors that 
members of the Floral Committee should be above a suspicion of 
partiality. 
I should like to see more of our best growers—as Messrs. Molyneux, 
W. Drover, G. Drover, Flight, and many others—occasionally elected; 
we should then probably have fewer inferior varieties certificated 
annually to be sold at fancy prices, and after a year or two’s careful 
growing consigned to the rubbish heap. In my opinion, certificates 
ought not to be awarded to new varieties till blooms can be shown in 
form and size equal, if not superior, to tho?e already in commerce. 
The N.C.S., it appears, has gained strength by the recent controversy, 
and if a better state of affairs can be brought about by the publicity 
given to what most people will consider highly discreditable proceedings. 
Chrysanthemum growers will, I am sure, tender their best thanks to the 
Journal of Horticulture. — G. Trindee, Dogmersfield Gardens, 
Winchfield. 
Judging Cut Blooms. 
Mr. Lambert (page 240) misses the point of my objection to th^ 
method of judging stands of cut blooms by comparison. Were I certain 
that every bloom in stand A would be pitted against the same variety in 
stand B 1 should advocate the comparison method ; but my argument is 
that never do two stands come in opposition containing the same 
varieties, and certainly never in the same order of arrangement to admit 
of their being compared readily. Where I hold that method of judging 
to be wrong is when one variety is pitted against another and at the 
same time the former is represented in both stands, but in such a position 
as to receive an injustice through being compelled to compete against a 
variety possessing points of merit not obtainable in the best grown bloom 
possible of the first named. 
Adjudicating by an agreed code of points dispenses with haphazard 
arrangement of any particular variety. Every bloom is appraised on its 
individual merits, and recorded clearly for future reference, if necessary. 
It is not so in “ comparison ” judging. How can a judge so effectually 
satisfy the wishes of a disappointed exhibitor as to the merits of any 
particular variety in relation to its influencing the award when this 
method is adopted / By carrying out a sysjtem of point judging refer¬ 
ence can be made to any bloom in the stand, years after if necessary. ■ - 
It is plain that Mr. Lambert’s experience of point judging is limited, 
or he would not say “ it means trusting to his mind’s eye to carry size, 
colour of say twenty-four or forty-eight blooms to a distance,” because 
just the opposite is the case. Every bloom is individually appraised, the 
total value of the stand in number of points determining its position, 
leaving the mind free for the next stand, and dispenses with the necessity 
of carrying stand after stand of blooms about the exhibition (no small 
matter when forty-eight classes are under consideration), very much 
impeded too by the public when they are admitted before judging is 
completed. 
Mr. Lambert’s method of granting a point for freshness after two 
stands are found equal comes quite as a revelation to me. From 
what I have seen of judges while making their awards, this point in 
a bloom is determined at first, and not left to decide the issue. If 
Mr. Lambert means by colour in relation to the arrangement of the 
blooms, or even to one stand having a greater variety than the other, I 
agree with the adding of an extra point; but if he means the colour, 
good or bad, of any bloom, then I do not agree with him, as that ought 
to be determined at first, as it is one of the salient points in a good 
bloom. Mr. Lambert is not quite clear on this latter point, but as he 
links colour with freshness the inference is that he means the colour of 
individual blooms. 
At how many exhibitions does Mr. Lambert judge in one season 
w’hsre the number of incurved blooms exceed one that is deserving of 
the maximum number of points, or even in the Japanese section ? 
Adjudicators with a wide experience inform me seldom is the case that 
more are found. When awarding the class prizes the best bloom is 
generally “ spotted ” by the number of points it merits. I should have 
no hesitation in awarding such a bloom the premier honour. Why 
judges carry such a bloom around for comparison before finally deciding 
the position of premier is to save time in carrying others to that 
“ spotted,” in case one should be met with deserving of an equal number 
of points ; but as this is I may say almost unprecedented the difficulty 
of determining is easily settled. 
A judge of experience would have no trouble in settling the question 
of superiority between two blooms no more than he would have in find¬ 
ing the strongest claim of one bunch of Grapes over that of another, but 
when twelve or more have to be decided, and all not on an equal basis, 
the method of defining the accuracy of judgment must be altered to 
meet the case.—S adoc. 
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
March 28th. 
The Drill Hall has rarely presented a more brilliant appearance than 
it did on Tuesday last, the building being full of exhibits, comprising 
stove and greenhouse plants. Ferns, Roses, hardy flowers, and Orchids. 
Furtunately, too, the weather was sufficiently bright to admit of their 
being seen to advantage. 
Fruit Committee. —Present ; Philip Crowley, Esq. (in the chair) ; 
with Dr. Hogg, Messrs. T. Francis Rivers, G. Bunyard, Harrison Weir, 
G. Taber, T. J. Saltmarsh, A. Moss, G. Woodward, W. Warren, A. Dean, 
A. H. Pearson, H. Balderson, F. Q. Lane, J. Hudson, G. Wythes, 
W. Bates, A. J. Laing, and J. Wright. 
Mr. Bannister, The Gardens, Cote House, Westbury-on-Trym, sent a 
dish of the Standard Bearer Apple that was shown in the autumn and 
granted an award of merit. The fruit had kept fairly well. The variety 
is of the Blenheim type, symmetrical, and no doubt a good culinary 
Apple. Mr. John Crook, Ford Abbey Gardens, Chard, sent a dish of 
Sturmer Pippin Apples that had been kept in a shed, and subjected to 
several degrees of frost. The fruits were firm, but possessed no flavour, 
as is generally the case with Apples that have been subjected to frost. 
Mr. G. Wythes, Syon House Gardens, sent a box of Vicomtesse 
Hericart de Thury Strawberries, fine fruit, excellently coloured, and well 
flavoured. A cultural commendation was unanimously awarded. Mr. 
Wythes also sent a dish of the St. John’s Fig, nearly ripe (vote of thanks). 
A similar mark of recognition was accorded to Mr. T. Osman, Ottershaw 
Gardens, for a dish of Strawberries, also a plate of white fleshy Mush¬ 
rooms. Mr. S. Hardy, Ash House, Parsons Green, sent a collection of 
Mushrooms packed for market—very fine produce, for which a cultural 
commendation was awarded. 
Mr. T. Lockie, The Gardens, Oakley Court, Windsor, sent an excellent 
brace of Lockie’s Perfection Cucumber. The fruits were about 
16 inches long, faultless in shape, and good in colour. They were cut 
on the 25th inst., the plants having been raised from seed sown 
January 9th. A cultural commendation was unanimously awarded. 
Mr. Harrison Weir sent Filberts gathered in 1891. They were kept in 
tins buried in the garden, and were fresh and firm, though with signs 
of germination apparent in some of them. (Vote of thanks.) 
Floral Committee. —Present : W. Marshall, Esq. (in the chair) ; 
Rev. H. H. D’Ombrain, Messrs. Owen Thomas, H. Herbst, R. Dean, 
C. T. Druery, G. Stevens, R. B. Lowe, G. Bause, J. Ross, G. Gordon, 
W. Furze, C. Jeffries, C. E. Shea, H. Turner, C. Noble, J. D. Pawle, 
G. Paul, H. B. May, J. Fraser, J. Jennings, R. Owen, G. Nicholson, 
and James Walker. 
Mons. Henry de Vilmorin exhibited a few flowers from the Riviera, 
chiefly Anemones and Narcissi. Messrs. Paul & Son, The Old Nurseries, 
Cheshunt, had a splendid group of Roses in pots Lilacs, Amaryllis, 
