96 
[ August 4, 18)2. 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER, 
promising. Boiard has a small petal, long and narrow ; still the 
flower is a very telling one in ^ stand, and it is a most useful red 
laced variety. Bertha (Paul’s) certainly beats Boiard, and that is 
saying a good deal ; a flower of excellent qualities, and broader in 
the lacing than as seen here last year ; pure white ground, and a 
very fine refined bloom. Princess Louise (Fellowes) is a modest 
style of flower, not so full of petals, but brighter in colour ; 
almost a fine Pink. Mrs. F. Hooper is this year somewhat irregular 
in lacing at Handsworth, but is a good variety to grow ; bright 
rosy purple lacing, good petal, and well formed. Zoe (Fellowes’) is 
brighter in colour than last year, heavy red lacing with fine grand 
petals, and is proving to be a fine flower. Ethel is another of the 
late Mr. Brown’s seedlings, light red, very regular lacing, fine 
petal, and a beautiful flower. Mrs. Dark, another of the Hands- 
worth seedlings, is a fine coloured flower, very constant ; a capital 
border variety, as the pods do not burst, and it is a good grower. 
Ophelia (Fellowes), light purple, broad lacing, and a well-built 
flower with good petal, but the lacing is irregular. Turner’s 
Godfrey is still one of the best of the old varieties. Fellowes’ 
Bessie is wanting in form, and at Handsworth is small, and not 
regarded as an acquisition, but is very bright in colour. Maclean’s 
Ernest has come very fine this year, exceedingly bright, broad red 
lacing, with better petals than Ada Louise, but of that style of 
flower. Fellowes’ Olympia is a very unsatisfactory flower here, 
yet in good growth. Here and there a good petal is to be seen, but 
it is rough in outline and margin. Campbell’s R. L. Hector is a 
dark shaded red lacing, good petal and form, and will make a fine 
flower. Fellowes’ Jeannette is another very broad laced flower, 
bright reddish purple ; large, and with broad petal, and a fine 
variety in every way. 
Fellowes’ Lorina is a late bloomer, large and full, with a broad 
petal and very dark red lacing. Not quite smooth on the edge, but 
a grand flower, and will be welcomed. Hooper’s Emerald is similar 
to Ada Louise, but not so fine nor so good as Ernest. Richard Dean 
(Hooper) must be discarded, as it cannot possibly be regarded as 
an acquisition, the petals, even to the guard petals, being so small. 
Hooper’s Ranger Johnson will also be discarded, as it is very rough 
and very unsatisfactory. The Rector has not done well here this 
year, and I am unable to say anything further than it was very 
fine at Wolverhampton last year, and is undoubtedly one of the 
best in cultivation. Hooper’s Harry Hooper, dark purple lacing, 
rather feathery, is one of the best. George White (Paul’s) 
light purple lacing is an old variety, but still excellent. Paul’s 
Emmeline, heavy purple lacing, superb petal, and a very fine 
flower, should be in every collection. Turner’s Galopin has heavy 
purple lacing, good petal, and fine in form. Hooper’s Yictory is 
discarded. Paul’s William Paul, a late variety, a fine rosy red 
lacing, is one of the best. Hooper’s James Douglas is a very bad 
grower but a very fine flower. 
Mr. Brown adopts layering as his mode of propagation ; he 
is now in the thick of it, and there can be no question as to the 
great advantages in doing so, as early, strong, well-rooted plants 
are ready for planting in September.—W. Dean. 
INSECTS OF THE FLOWER GARDEN. 
(Continued from page 437, last volume .) 
If insects of the aphis tribe are, in the usual order of things, 
the most numerous about gardens, the most conspicuous are cer¬ 
tainly the hosts of species belonging to the tribe of two-winged 
flies. We see them both in sunshine and in shade (though they 
prefer the former) from the first warm days of spring to the last 
sunny days of autumn which usher in winter, and they are on the 
wing all the daylight; but, as a rule, flies do not take excursions 
after dark. In this respect they are like insects of the bee tribe, 
some of which many species of flies neaidy resemble, while there 
are also bees that are commonly called flies. Considered as 
personal foes flies are really more annoying to us than bees, though 
they cannot sting, since in some species a puncture from the 
proboscis becomes the cause of irritation lasting several days, 
owing to poison being thrown into the wound. Readers will 
remember the recent case of blood-poisoning by the so-called 
“bite” of a gadfly at Hatfield, Mr. Balfour’s private secretary 
being the victim. This must be regarded as an exceptional occur¬ 
rence ; but many persons have suffered severely in the summer 
from the stings of the common gnat or some of its relatives. It is 
not only in the open country that these insects attack people, they 
do so frequently in gardens, and one reason for this is that some 
gardeners have tanks or tubs of rain water which attract gnats, 
and in which they place their boats of eggs, the larvae being 
aquatic. It is therefore desirable, for the comfort of those who 
may be liable to attacks from such insects, that any water re¬ 
ceptacles in which they might breed should either be emptied 
whenever the presence of gnat larvae is discovered, or else so 
covered over that the insects cannot deposit their eggs. 
The objects with which flies haunt the flower beds and plant 
houses are various. Many species come for the honey, and a few 
eat the pollen of flowers, as Prof. J. R. Green remarks. Flies gene¬ 
rally exhibit only a low order of intelligence, hence in their visits to 
flowers they show themselves to be both shy and lazy. It has been 
noticed that they resort to yellow or white flowers quite twice as 
often as they do to red or blue ones. Like the bees, they do us 
service by carrying pollen from one flower to another upon their 
bodies, and are specially useful amongst the plants where the male 
and female flowers are separate. Death is the penalty which some 
flies pay who are enticed by a sweet secretion to enter the pitchers 
of species of Cephalotus, Sarracenia, and other exotics, which are 
conspicuous insect killers, and we have also a few native plants 
that entrap small insects ; the Sundew is an instance. Then there 
are flowers which do not kill flies, but hold them in temporary con¬ 
finement, such as the Arum and the Aristolochia, and this evidently 
helps on fertilisation. Entering one of these a fly has to push past 
a fringe of hairs, which afterwards spring back, keeping it prisoner 
till they have withered. Should the insect have entered bearing 
pollen grains of that particular species it is likely to leave them on 
the stigmas, and will probably quit the flower with a fresh supply 
to bear elsewhere received from its anthers. We may safely regard 
the majority of flies that visit our flowers as neither friends nor 
foes, but there are those whose habits are predatory, and which 
either in the imago or larva state seize other insects annoying to us : 
also there are groups of flies which are certainly unwelcome to 
us, for they leave behind eggs which produce larvae certainly 
mischievous. 
The name of “ fly ” is not, however, the sole property of the 
Dipterous order, for it is commonly applied to the aphides, green, 
black, and brown, though they might more appropriately bear that 
of “ bugs,” which suits their position and habit of life. Several 
small beetles have also been called flies, but I am glad to think 
most gardeners are now able to discriminate between a true and a 
supposed fly without being learned in entomology. To the larva 
of a fly the appellation of maggot is familiarly given, an expressive 
word, coming from an old phrase alluding to the rapidity with 
which flies breed or increase. Also it is sometimes called a grub. 
This name is applied to larvae of various insects that are really or 
seemingly legless, and to their stumpy or short pupae. Though all 
the larvae of flies lack these useful appendages, most of them 
display much activity, and possess an array of muscles enabling 
them to force their way through obstacles, but of course they 
cannot crawl on flat surfaces. Some fly larvae are exceptional, in 
remaining without motion all their life, hidden amongst the 
substance supplying them with food. 
I think any ordinary observer who has watched flies will have 
noted the fact that they might be readily divided into two groups 
by this peculiarity, that some have long, thin antennae or 
“feelers,” and some have short. Those with the thread-like 
antennae are, besides, remarkable for slight bodies, small heads and 
long legs, which, when the insects are on the wing, are stretched 
backwards and downwards. We call these flies the Nemocera, but 
they constitute the smaller group. The greater number of these 
insects belong to the Brachycera division, having antennae with 
only a few joints and stoutish bodies. Passing by some curious 
and tiny flies, more often seen hopping than flying, feeders upon 
fungi, and therefore not particularly noticeable in flower gardens, 
we come first to the very pi’etty and lively flies which are called 
the Cecidomyiae, and which put their mark upon some of our 
garden plants. Many people probably consider them to be small 
gnats, though they are distinct from those familiar insects, but, 
like them, they have antennae, which, as a glass shows, are very 
ornamental, and the little glossy wings exhibit rainbow tints. 
Everybody has seen the knobby enlargements on the stalks and 
leaves of the common Nettle, and the reddish swellings at the tips 
of the boughs of the Osier ; these are the homes of Cecidomyia 
larvae ; nor are such absent from the flower garden, where they 
contort shoots or buds, produce galls upon leaves, and even dis¬ 
figure flowers by making them their abodes. On the Spiraea, for 
instance, we often find red and green warts caused by C. ulmaria, 
and I have detected upon the Chrysanthemum tiny galls, caused, 
presumably, by one of these flies, which, however, does not appear 
to be common, and only touches the foliage, not the flowers. 
Sociality is characteristic of the Cecidomyiae, and parties of 
them circle about their favourite plants at early morning during the 
season they are on the wing. Chasing them would be compara¬ 
tively useless, but it is possible to decrease their numbers by re¬ 
moving and destroying leaves or flowers showing the presence of 
the larvae. It is seldom, however, that they are abundant enough 
upon any plant to disfigure it seriously. But I have been asked 
whether, seeing the presence of the larvae of these gall-gnats—shall 
