July 21, 1802. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
63 
full significance of the conditions indicated, especially when it is added 
that the display was under canvas. A warning of what was to come 
was received the night before when perambulating the city walls, under 
the guidance of a human relic, who gave free play to a copious imagina¬ 
tion when precise knowledge failed him. Objects were pointed out that 
could only be seen clearly “ when it was going to rain,” and the boldness 
with which they stood out gave dismal forebodings of the morrow. An 
eadeavour was made to extract comfort from his general mendacity, but, 
such is the irony of fate, in this particular at least he had spoken truly. 
Strangely suggestive, too, was the title of the venue. The Show was 
announced to the held in the Folly Field, Flooker’s brook. A folly it 
proved indeed, and whoever Mr. Flooker may be or have been, his 
brook appeared to have spread itself all over the scene of action. 
Misfortunes, it is known, never come singly, and so it proved in this 
case. By some accident, oversight, or what not, the arrangement of the 
boxes turned out to be all wrong, and precious time was cut to waste in 
re-arranging the Show, consequently the judging did not commence till 
after twelve o’clock. Had the day been sunny and balmy this would 
have mattered less, but under the circumstances the delay was rather 
trying to the temper. Perhaps the latter accounts for the vehement 
endeavours of one gentleman to turn all unauthorised persons, ladies 
included, out into a soaking field in the pouring rain ; but he was 
humanely overruled, and the Judges and reporters endured the dis¬ 
comfort. After all it was no great matter. Lovers of Roses do not 
allow their interest and enthusiasm to be easily damped when there is a 
good display of flowers before them. If they were such tender creatures 
as to be afraid of rain and occasional inconvenience such grand flowers 
would never be grown. And it is gratifying to be able to say that the 
display was good. We m'ght safely go further, and say that it was a 
splendid one. This was the crowning consolation of what was in most 
respects a gloomy day. Not only were the flowers fine, they were 
abundantly so. It was not a case of a few exceptional blooms; there 
was a general high level of excellence all through. That some stands 
were distinctly better than others was to be expected, and, from the 
Judges’ point of view, it was desirable ; but it was not a case of one 
being very good and the others very bad ; on the contrary, the seconds 
and thirds were good in almost every class. Take, for example, the 
Jubilee classes. In the nurserymen’s the first, second, and third were all 
high-class stands, and in the unplaced division the quality was of 
uniform excellence. Mr. B. R. Cant’s victory, of which recent develop¬ 
ments had led anticipations to be formed, was not gained without a 
struggle, nevertheless it was decisive. In the amateurs’ there were two 
very fine stands, those of Mr. Budd and the Rev. J. H. Pemberton, 
while Mr. Lindsell’s was excellent too. In our report of the Crystal 
Palace and Reigate Shows we commented specially on the marked 
improvement of the Bath amateur, and his success was therefore not a 
surprise. Mr. Pemberton’s defeat speaks volumes for the quality of 
Mr. Budd’s blooms, for the Havering parson has proved conclusively in 
the past what a dangerous opponent he is late in the season. Mr. 
Lindsell is well known to be an “ early man,” and his overthrow at late 
shows is not unexpected, but it must in justice to him be stated 
that there was no stand in the section equal to his Earl’s Court forty- 
eight. Like Mr. Frank Cant, he can well afford to rest on his early 
laurels. 
In the largest trade class, that for seventy-two blooms, “ B. R.” again 
showed splendidly, and as he achieved a third victory with thirty-six 
trebles, it is evident that he is just now at his strongest. Messrs. 
Harkness have been hampered by the peculiar season, but had several 
good stands, and a special note should be made of Mr. H. Merryweather’s 
improvement. The Southwell grower secured several first prizes, as 
well as the silver medal for the best H.P. The want of some clearly 
defined standard by which to judge was clearly shown in one or two of 
the Tea classes, that for twelve blooms (class 21) being perhaps the 
most notable case. In size and weight Messrs. Prior & Son were 
undoubtedly first, and the award went to them, but the blooms were 
sadly tarnished, some of the lower petals being very bad, where.,8 the 
second prize flowers were as clean and fresh as if they had been cut 
under glass, though not quite so heavy as the others. It is probable 
that a higher scale of points would improve matters in many cases, but 
in the present one the Judges were possibly unduly hurried owing to the 
lateness of the commencement. 
The Jubilee Classes. 
The Jubilee classes were instituted in 1887, and two challenge 
trophies value 50 guineas were provided—one for nurserymen, who were 
to exhibit thirty-six blooms, the other for amateurs, who were to exhibit 
twenty-four, the trophies being held for one year by the winners. 
These correspond with the challenge trophies at the Metropolitan 
Exhibition, and far more interest is naturally invested in them than in 
the largest of the ordinary classes. In the trade section Messrs. Hark¬ 
ness k Son scored a magnificent sequence of four consecutive victories 
until last season, when their unbeaten record was broken by Mr. Frank 
Cant. This year the latter carried all before him earlier in the season, 
and it was hardly to be expected that he would maintain his full 
strength until the close of the season. Mr. B. R. Cant, on the other 
hand, has been steadily creeping up, while the quality of Messrs. Hark¬ 
ness k Son’s blooms was practically an unknown quantity owing to 
their enforced absence from many of the leading shows. They might 
come out strongly with a kind of meteoric burst, or they might be weak, 
Events showed that both the previous winners were doomed to defeat, 
as when the four boxes were uncovered Mr. B. R. Cant was seen to be 
clearly ahead, and the award of the Judges subsequently supported 
general impressions. The veteran had a grand collection of flowers, 
certainly one of the best in the Show, or even of the season. His 
varieties were Her Majesty, Countess of Rosebery, Comte de Raimbaud, 
Chas. Lefebvre, Madame Cusin (very fine), Etienne Levet, Marie 
Baumann, Victor Hugo, Eugenie Verdier, Comte de Paris, Lady Mary 
Fitzwilliam, Madame Victor Verdier, Paul Neyron (superb), Dupuy 
Jamain, Lady Sheffield, Ulrich Brunner, La France, Duke of Edinburgh, 
Mrs. John Laing, Alfred Colomb (splendid), Ducbesse de Moray, 
Madame Isaac Pereire, Francois Michelon (somewhat weak, an unfor¬ 
tunate blemish in an otherwise splendid stand), Prince Camille de 
Rohan, Suzanne Marie Rodocanachi, Gustave Piganeau, Jeannie Dickson, 
Earl of Dufferin (grand), Ernest Metz, Madame Crapelet, Marie Verdier, 
A. K. Williams, Pride of Waltham, Countess of Oxford, Star of 
Waltham, and Prince Arthur (magnificent). This stand was full of 
fine flowers, and exceptionally rich in colour. There was a lustrous 
glow about the blooms that betokened perfect condition. It is doubtful 
if a finer Prince Arthur has ever been shown than the last bloom in this 
stand. Mr. Frank Cant also had an admirable stand, but must have 
been several points behind. His flowers were very fine in colour and 
condition, but Baroness Rothschild and one or two others were rather 
weak. Perhaps the best flowers were G4n4ral Jacqueminot, Dupuy 
Jamain, Suzanne Marie Rodocanachi, Mrs. John Laing, and Gustave 
Piganeau. He was unmistakeably second. Messrs. Harkness k Sons 
were third with a very good stand, somewhat lacking in weight. The 
flowers were very fresh and bright, Gustave Piganeau being an admirable 
example. 
The amateurs’ contest for the trophy has been almost as remarkable 
for the success of Mr. Pemberton as that of the nurserymen for the 
victories of Messrs. Harkness. It is true that in 1887 and 1888 that 
sterling grower, Mr. T. B. Hall of Rock Ferry, whom all would like to 
see in battle array once more, was the winner, but in the three succeed¬ 
ing seasons Mr. Pemberton was at the top of the tree. It seems almost 
a pity in one respect to spoil so fine a record as he was building up, but 
honour must be given where honour is due, and on the present occasion 
he was fairly, though by no means easily, defeated by Mr. Budd. If 
anyone deserved to taste the sweets of victory in the trophy class it was 
the latter. He is not only an excellent but a persevering grower. This 
season he has improved himself many points, and though hardly a 
match for Mr. Lindsell in the form the latter displayed at the Palace 
and Earl’s Court, he has maintained the quality of his flowers admirably 
throughout the season. In the Journal report of the Metropolitan 
Exhibition it was suggested that with perseverance Mr. Budd might yet 
see his name in the honours list, but it was hardly thought that it 
would be so soon. On this occasion he had very heavy and richly 
coloured flowers, the varieties being Gustave Piganeau, Dr. Andry, Earl 
of Dufferin, Heinrich Schultheis, Louis Van Houtte, Madame Van 
Houtte (splendid), Marie Rady, Merveille de Lyon, Star of Waltham, 
Mrs. Paul, Chas. Lefebvre, Duke of Albany, Mrs. J. Laing. Ella Gordon, 
Alfred Colomb (very fine), Her Majesty, Duchess of Bedford, Harrison 
Weir, Marie Baumann, Marie Van Houtte, A. K. Williams, Francois 
Michelon, Etienne Levet, and Duke of Wellington. Mr. Pemberton’s 
stand was a very fine one, but rather uneven. Her Majesty, Grandeur 
of Cheshunt, and Xavier Olibo were three of the best flowers, this trio 
being very fine. He was distinctly second. Mr. Lindsell was many 
points behind his form early in the season, but he has a record of which 
he may well be proud, and although only third on the present occasion, 
the magnificent flowers he staged a fortnight previously, will make the 
season a memorable one. 
Nurserymen’s Division. 
To come to the ordinary classes in the schedule, good even quality 
throughout may be chronicled, although it was evident that the trade 
growers had concentrated their best blooms on the trophy competition. 
The principal class was for seventy-two blooms, and Mr. B. R. Cant, 
evidently in a winning vein, was again successful. His stand was 
composed of very bright fresh blooms, well coloured, but not very large. 
The best examples were undoubtedly Marie Van Houtte, Lady Helen 
Stewart, Victor Hugo, Ernest Metz, Mrs. John Laing, Marie Baumann 
(very fine), Duke of Edinburgh, Her Majesty, Gustave Piganeau, and 
Mrs. Paul. Mr. Frank Cant was second, very little in the rear, his 
blooms being large and rich, but one or two were rather past their best. 
Star of Waltham, Beauty of Waltham, Pride of Reigate, Souvenir de 
S. A. Prince, and Dr. Andry were conspicuous for their good quality. 
Messrs. Harkness & Son were third. This class was not so good as the 
seventy-two at the Palace, but with the Jubilee competition in view 
the growers could not be expected to show their best blooms in the 
big class. 
In class 2, thirty-six varieties, distinct, three trusses of each, were 
asked for, and once more Mr. B. R. Cant was first. He is invariably 
strong with trebles, but his present stand, though a very good one, was 
not the best he has arranged this year. The great majority of the 
flowers were large and in good condition, but one or two were a little 
soiled. The varieties were Marie Baumann, Gustave Piganeau (very 
fine), La France, Duke of Edinburgh, A. K. Williams, Heinrich Schultheis, 
Baroness Rothschild, G<5n4ral Jacqueminot, Dupuy Jamain, Madame 
Crapelet, Marie Finger, Prince Arthur, Alfred Colomb, Niphetos, Her 
Majesty, Prince Camille de Rohan, Earl of Dufferin, Marquise de 
Castellane, Duchesse de Vallombrosa, Charles Lefebvre (very good), 
Fisher Holmes, Pride of Waltham, Ernest Metz, Xavier Olibo, Ulrich 
Brunner, Lady Sheffield, Jeannie Dickson, Victor Hugo, Maurice 
Bernardin, Marie Verdier, Lady Helen Stewart, Sbnateur Vaisse, Beauty 
of Waltham, Madame Cusin, Mrs. John Laing, and Madame Victor 
