310 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
t April JO, 1893. 
Stray Notes. 
Those who have only taken to Eose-growing within the last six or 
eight years may probably never have had to prune their plants when 
in full leaf, as is the case this year in many places, and may be alarmed 
at the “bleeding” which naturally follows severe cutting down to 
ripened wood when the sap is so forward. There was some corre¬ 
spondence in the Journal on the subject in the last early spring we 
had (a long time ago 1) ; and the general idea, with which I am quite 
in accord, was that there was little serious damage done, as the wounds 
soon heal. It is certainly a dismal sight to see the poor plants next 
day literally batbed in their own blood, and keeping the soil quite damp 
round them for several inches. I avoid it by the simple process of not 
going near them for a week or so, by which time they will have dried 
up, and then soon commence to break. I remember one year, when my 
Teas before pruning were a mass of foliage, with great shoots 6 or 
8 inches long, that I rubbed off most of these two or three days before 
applying the knife with a view of checking the sap, but I do not 
remember that it had much effect in staying the bleeding. 
I have noted one advantage of such an early spring in the comparative 
absence of grubs and caterpillars later on. I have always supposed 
that when the top buds break early the parent insects lay their eggs in 
these, which are happily cut away and consigned to the rubbish heap. 
We shall see if it is so on this occasion. 
On April 7th I dug up or rather carefully uncovered and reinstated 
my Mar^chal Niels and standard Teas which had been pegged down, 
buried and clamped last autumn, and at present I like the look of them. 
There is not a shoot injured by frost or damp, and they are very back¬ 
ward, having made no sign of growth ; they, at least, can be pruned 
without any fear of bleeding. My Tea buds, which have wintered 
beneath the straw nightcaps, show a better percentage than usual, with 
an exception—those on old stocks. When many Tea buds fail in 
the winter I am sure rosarians of an economical turn of mind, like 
myself, are loth to throw away strong standard stocks, and so retain 
them for budding again; but it does not answer as a rule, at least for 
Teas. Why, when these old stocks make plenty of strong and healthy 
growth they shoula fail to take or lose their buds in the winter if they 
do take is one of the many things I cannot understand, but I have 
generally found it is so. This spring I have hardly a bud alive on the 
old stocks, whereas I have quite a fair percentage on those collected the 
winter before budding. 
“ Suburban” (page 280) will find that Roses on asouth wall are not 
infrequently in bloom in April in favoured localities. 1 have had 
Mar^chal Niel fine on the 26th, quite unprotected ; but that was a long 
time ago. 
Mr. D. R. Williamson (page 280) is quite in error in supposing 
that most of the English rosarians, with the exception of Mr. B. R. Cant, 
grow their Teas and Noisettes under glass. Most would have some in 
houses ; but even Messrs. Harkness, in Yorkshire, grow almost all of 
theirs out of doors, and I think it may be said that all the principal 
English rosarians grow the large majority of their Teas entirely in the 
open air. Even those Teas exhibited at the Westminster National Rose 
Society’s Show in June are almost invariably cut from plants in the open. 
I think, too, that it is hardly correct, to be strictly accurate, to speak 
of the original of a sport as a “ parent ” Rose. Sports not infrequently 
revert, even after they have become what are called “ fixed ” sports. The 
best Baroness Rothschild that I cut last season came from a Merveille 
de Lyon plant, which had one or two pure white blooms on it at the 
same time. And as to Mrs. Paul, Mr. Williamson seems more “ mixed ” 
than ever. In the first place, this is not a sport but a seedling from 
Madame Isaac Pereire (who cannot very well be called “ Isaac him¬ 
self ”) ; and also it seems rather hard on Mrs. Paul that its claim to be 
a pure Bourbon should be denied because Mr. Williamson has seen its 
seed parent wrongfully described as H.P. or H.B.—W. R. Raillem. 
MISS ORMEROD AND HER WORK. 
A DAILY contemporary alludes as follows to Miss Ormerod and her 
work “ Mi-is Eleanor A. Ormerod, who has just issued her sixteenth 
Report of Observations of Injurious Insects and Common Farm Pests, 
witu Methods of Prevention and Remedy, is one of the most remarkable 
women of her time. 8he was born at Chepstow Park, near Sudbury, 
and trom her chi dhood was excessively fond of observing both plant and 
animal life, for which the position of her father’s property (her father, 
by the way. being a well-known Cheshire historian, Oeo. Ormerod, D.C.L. 
and F. R.S ) with a mixture of cliffs and shore, woodland and cultivated 
and, aff .rded admirable opportunities. Successive illnesses, bringing 
with inem the necessity of quiet occupation, gave also the opportunity, 
u y utilised, of much reading, enabling her to lay a foundation of 
knowledge of botany, entomology, and agricultural chemistry, also of 
Latin and several Continental languages, and especially a facility in the 
use of the pencil and brush, all of which have proved of great service to 
her in her subsequent labours. In 1872 Miss Ormerod was chosen to 
represent British Natural History modelling from life at the Inter¬ 
national Polytechnic Exhibition, Moscow, but it was not till five years 
later that she commenced the series of annual reports that alone have 
made her name a ‘ household word ’ in the agricultural world. At 
present she carries on what is almost a Government department at her 
own expense It is a pleasure to her to reply to any inquiries received 
from British agriculturists, and a sense of the fact that she has aided 
them in their struggles is all the reward for which she cares.” 
The sixteenth Report of Observations of Injurious Insects * fully 
sustains the author’s reputation as an ardent worker in collecting facts 
relating to the infections of field, forest, and garden crops, and diffusing 
information respecting them. It opens with a full page illustration of 
Turnip affected by the disease known as ambury, finger-and-toe, or club, 
caused by slime fungus (Plasmodrophora brassiere), from a photograph, 
and a figure is given on page 148 of a “ spindly and much-divided growth 
to which formerly the name of Finger-and-toe was somerimes given. 
This is in no way a diseased growth, rather the reverse.” No one, there¬ 
fore, can make a mistake by a comparison of the two illustrations 
between the diseased and healthy condition of the roots. Photographic 
illustrations (two) are alio given of club or ambury in Cabbage roots, 
with representations of the spores and embryos of the fungus causing 
the mischief. We are told that gas-lime is a good preventive of this 
disease ; also that “ a mixture of superphosphate and kainit, and an 
extended system of cropping, will in general prove effective.” The 
latter—change of crop—is (in our experience) the safest and (next to a 
large dose of gas-lime) the most effectual cure for this disease. Super¬ 
phosphate is well known as the best manure for Turnips, and kainit by 
supplying salt (mainly) must strengthen the plant, and potash prove 
arivantageous, particularly on light soils. Salt alone we have found 
practically useless, and quicklime, though useful against the slime 
fungus, liberates the fixed nitrogen-forming ammonia—the most volatile 
of elements. It is stated, however, by Miss Ormerod that “lime and 
soot have been found to answer for checking club presence,” and an 
instance is given by Mr. Eyden as follows :—“ When I first came here I 
had whole breadths spoilt of Broccoli and Caulifiowers, which have been 
more subject to attack here than any other green. The first year I was 
here I found I had got a bed of plants attacked ; I pulled all up and 
burnt them. I simply sowed some lime on the ground and replanted it, 
dipping the roots of each plant in sooty water before planting it, and 
when taken up not one root was in the least affected. Since then 
[Mr. Eyden’s experience extends over twenty-two years] I have always 
treated them in the same way, and have had very few clubs.” This 
is simply the old fashioned gardener’s preventive of club root in 
Brasiicas during the past two centuries, and it is doubtful if the ambury 
or club root was caused by slime fungus, though the lime might be use¬ 
ful against its germs, and the soot acting as a preventive only of the 
club root caused by Turnip and Cabbage root-gall weevil (Centorhynchus 
Bulcicoll s, GylL), These are difftrent infections, as also is that caused 
by Turnip and Cabbage-root flies (Anthomyia radicum, Linn.). Our 
talented author has got a little “ mixed” in her “ Turnip and Cabbage- 
root attacks,” and we suggest that they form three definite headings in 
future reports. The three forms are, however, treated in the sixteenth 
report in an able manner, but they would carry more weight were each 
put separately in the scales. These subjects form the first (a frontis¬ 
piece) and the last in the report, except an appendix treating of 
Mangolds. The Mangold leaf-blister maggot, the larvae of Anthomyia 
(Chortophila) betas, Curtis, being fully treated with illustrations (the 
maggot being shown on part of what appears a Celery leaf) on page 83 
of the Report, infestations being more prevalent in the south than in the 
north of England. 
The attack of the larvm of the Alder or white-barred clearwing moth 
is noticed as affecting Alder trees in Wales and ruining them, as we have 
also noticed in Flintshire over twenty years ago. Garden chafer. May 
bug, or Rose beetle is recorded as destructive to the foliage of Apple 
trees in 1892 ; also the larvre of the Apple sawfly, which, though a 
common infutatiou, cause the young Apples to fall in shoals, the same 
thing occurring to Crabs. Asparagus beetle receives a generous share of 
attention ; Cabbage aphis. Onion fly. Pea weevils, and root-knot eel- 
worm in Tnmito roots are libetally treated. The latter is stated to cause 
knots or galls on the roots of Tomato, Cucumber, Potato, Parsnip, Peach, 
Vine, Lettuce, and many other plants, which may be more or less 
correct, but the galls are in many cases perfectly innocent of eelwo'ms. 
Nevertheless, root-knot eelworm (Heteroiera radicola, Greef.) has 
proved destructive to the gardener’s crops of Cucumbers, Melons, 
Vegetable Marrows, and Tomatoes, whilst the pla tsman often finds it 
destroys his Gardenias at the collar or neck by an abnormal gouty 
excrescence. Miss Ormerod mentions a Tom to gri wer that has suffered 
losses to the extent of tons of fruit. An excellent illustration is given 
of Tomato roots galled by attack of Heterodera radicicola (two renderings 
of the specific name being given, the latter being Muller’s), It is also 
called Aiigurllula radicola. 
Mention is made of Lettuce as a trap for eelworms, it being sown as 
early in spring as possible, so that Tomato growers may sow the Tomato 
beds or borders with Lettuce in advance of planting the Tomato plants, 
and clear the Lettuce away with the eelworms, of course, and thus save 
the Tomato plants, otherwise no cure is known but “ starving out ” the 
* London : Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton & Co. 
