December 22, 1892. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
553 
and exhaustive chapters on culture, while those which follow on “ Fancy 
Ways of Growing Ferns,” and “ Fern Foes, British and Exotic,” are 
little inferior in interest or value. The next chapter opens the 
descriptive portion of the hook. Acrostichum is the first genus taken, 
and it will give a general idea of the course pursued throughout to 
indicate the method of considering this genus. A brief general 
description is first given, then the various groups enumerated in the 
genus are indicated ; culture forms the third point, and finally the 
principal species and varieties are dealt with. One quotation will 
serve to show how all are treated. “A. (Polybotrya) acuminatum, 
Pol-yb-ot'-iy-a ac-u'-min-a'-tum (taper-pointed) Hooker. On account 
of the drooping character of its light green fronds, of a firm texfure, 
which are abundantly produced from a thick climbing rh'zome 
(prostrate stem) this Brazilian stove species may be considered one of 
the most decorative kinds comprised in the genus. The barren fronds, 
borne on firm, erect stipes (stalks) 4 to 6 inches long and scaly through¬ 
out, are from 1 foot to 2 feet long and fully 1 foot broad, deltoid (in 
form of the Greek delta A) and simply pinnate (divided to the midrib), 
with their upper pinnae (leaflets) slightly lobed, truncate (terminating 
abruptly) on the lower side at the base, 6 to 8 inches long and 4 to 
6 inches broad, usually furnished with small pinnules (leafits) on each 
side. The fertile fronds are 1 foot long, deltoid, and thrice pinnate. 
Hooker, Species Filicum, v., page 245. Nicholson, Dictionary of 
Gardening, i., page 19. Although its fertile fronds are said to be sub- 
quadripinnatifid (four times nearly divided to the midrib) at the base, 
the Peruvian A. ( Polybotrya ) nutans, Kunze, appears to be closely 
related to this species.” 
It will be seen that Mr. Schneider is not afraid to employ abundance 
of explanatory English terms in order to make the meaning clear, and 
the plan adopted is a distinctly educational one. The first volume, 
which consists of 660 pages in bold type, and is enriched with many 
good plates and engravings, takes the work up to and inclusive of the 
genus Asplenium. If completed, as there is no reason to doubt that it 
will be, in the same thorough, comprehensive and careful manner, it will 
be a standard work of reference, invaluable alike to advanced growers 
and beginners. Mr. Schneider is to be congratulated on performing a 
long and difficult task with signal success. 
National Chrysanthemum Society. 
The General Committee of this Society held a meeting at Anderton’s 
Hotel last Monday evening, Mr. R. Ballantine occupying the 
chair. Several business preliminaries, in the way of minutes, corre¬ 
spondence, &c„ having been disposed of, the Secretary announced that 
Mr. A. Taylor had made an interesting report concerning the cut 
blooms staged on the occasion of the November Show. Altogether 
there were 2163 cut flowers shown, of which 1134 were Japanese in 
142 varieties, 642 incurved in 75 varieties, and the remaining 387 con¬ 
sisted of reflexed, Anemone, Japanese Anemones, and Pompons. The 
most popular varieties being a matter of some interest, it may be 
mentioned that in the Japanese section Avalanche was shown 84 times, 
Viviand Morel 68, Sunflower 62, E. Molyneux 47, W. H. Lincoln 45, 
and Etoile de Lyon 40. The leading incurved were Princess of 
Wales 47, Empress of India 40, Lord Alcester 39, Jeanne d’Arc 31, Queen 
of England 31, and Lord Wolseley 28. 
The Beauty of Exmouth Case —As we were.— The report of 
the Sub-Committee appointed to inquire into charges made some time 
since against a member of the Floral Committee was then received, and 
considerable discussion arose upon it. The resolution passed by the 
Sub-Committee, and published in the Journal of Horticulture on 3rd 
November, was referred to, since which it was stated that the person 
implicated, whose name had been confided to the Sub-Committee, had 
made a sworn statement denying many of the main facts in the charge 
made by Mr. Godfrey, and after taking legal advice the Sub-Committee 
considered it was not incumbent on them to publicly make known the 
person’s name, as they might incur an action for libel, and that it was 
for the Journal of Horticulture, where the charge appeared, to do so. 
Their decision had been communicated to the Editor, and he had refused 
to publish it. 
Mr. Rundell did not regard the report as satisfactory, the name of 
the member ought to be mentioned. 
Mr. Addison weDt into the matter at great length, commenting 
upon the conduct of the Sub-Committee, and saying he should oppose 
the adoption of their report. He thought such charges as this detri¬ 
mental to the Society, and considering the length of time that had 
elapsed, that the matter should have been satisfactorily dealt with. If 
they had secured a sworn statement from one party, had an opportunity 
been given to the other to corroborate or dispute any fact called into 
question ? Again, had inquiries been made as to whether the member 
was the kind of man to do such a thing ? There was another charge 
contained in a letter against a member, and Mr. Addison was proceeding 
to remark upon this, but was ruled out of order. 
Mr. Jukes said he was not less careful of the good name of the 
Society than the preceding speaker. The way in which the charge had 
been made rendered it very difficult for a Committee to meet. It was 
easy to say the Society could deal with the member, but he gives an 
answer upon a sworn statement that the charges are untrue. If they 
attached his name to the charge they laid themselves open to an action, 
and as the charge was made by the Journal the least the Editor could 
do was to take the responsibility on his own shoulders. The Committee 
had asked for the name to be published ; up to the present it had not 
been, and in the face of the sworn statement they would not incur the 
risk of an action by attaching the member’s name publicly to the charge. 
If that were published they could deal with the question more fully; 
until then they could do nothing. 
Mr. Fowler spoke on the importance of such definite charges being 
cleared up. He thought if the member waived any legal rights and 
came before the Committee, and Mr. Godfrey were asked to come too, 
the Committee could deal with the case. He was afraid outsiders would 
consider the question shelved, especially as the Committee’s letter to 
the Journal was not made public. 
In the end the report was adopted. 
A Member Condemned. —Another complaint against a member was 
then brought forward, and a resolution passed condemning the member 
against whom it was made. 
Show Boards as Hitherto. —A discussion of some length ensued 
upon the question of enlarged show boards, the Schedule Sub-Com¬ 
mittee recommending the regulation to remain as hitherto. Against the 
proposal was urged the expense, also the probability of many exhibitors 
and affiliated societies withdrawing if made compulsory. Mr. Jukes, 
Mr. Fowler, Mr. Gibson, and Mr. Rowbotham were the principal 
speakers on the subject. The Foreign Secretary was strongly of opinion 
that cut blooms were intended to be shown as individual specimens of 
good culture and not as collections. The present boards were not of 
sufficient dimensions to enable the blooms to be examined properly, and 
he moved as an amendment, “ That the resolution passed at the Con¬ 
ference be put into force at all the shows of the N.C.S. in the open 
classes for Japanese cut blooms.” The amendment, however, was lost, 
and the view held at the Conference has therefore had no practical 
effect. 
Two provincial and three colonial societies were affiliated. The dates 
fixed for the 1893 Shows are as follows :—11th, 12th, and 13th October ; 
7th, 8tb, and 9th November; 5th, 6th, and 7th December. It is not 
intended to hold a September one, but a sum of money will be set apart 
to provide prizes at a show held in that month by the Aquarium 
Company.—( Communicated ). 
[After Mr. Fowler’s suggestion it may be expected that the nameless 
member will hasten to “ waive his legal rights ” and welcome an oppor¬ 
tunity for a full examination of himself and Mr. Godfrey, with such 
witnesses as either can produce for enabling the examining committee 
to arrive at the true facts of the case. Is Mr. Godfrey willing to act in 
accordance with Mr. Fowler’s sensible and practical proposition ?] 
National Chrysanthemum Society. 
I can only express my regret if the phraseology of my last letter 
did not please Mr. Dean ; but passing over that, and fully allowing 
every statement which he makes, the undeniable fact still remains— 
that the Society, though called “ National,” is entirely governed and 
managed by the metropolitan section, the provincial growers being only 
directly represented by one member out of the total of fifty-seven 
forming the two committees. That this is a matter for regret will, 
I think, he generally admitted, and I think also that a far-sighted 
executive should endeavour to remedy the evil, even if caused by the 
apathy of those who ought to be most interested, as the stability of any 
erection depends to a certain extent upon the width of the base bearing 
proper proportion to its height, and neglect of the principles of 
construction is usually followed sooner or later by ruin.— Chas. E. 
Pearson. 
In answer to Mr. Pearson’s comments I notice that Mr. Dean 
(page 480) takes exception to the terms used by Mr. Pearson, as 
“ London clique ” and “ metropolitan exclusiveness,” and he also invites 
Mr. P. to inquire a little more closely into the methods of the N.C.S. 
I have taken the hint meant for Mr. Pearson. Can Mr. Dean inform 
us how it is that so many really good Chrysanthemum growers who do 
not reside in London, are not on the Committee, or even in touch with 
the N.C.S., although their hearts are in the cause of the Chrysanthemum ? 
Mr. Dean invites an investigation of the doings of the N.C.S. I, with 
many others, will be glad to learn what is likely to be the result of the 
investigation, by the Sub-Committee, into the “ Beauty of Exmouth ” 
case ? The Society cannot intend to drop the matter as if it was a “ hot 
coal.” The Sub-Committee, according to Mr. Godfrey’s statement, has 
the name of the person charged with the irregularity ; then what, may 
I ask, would be gained by making such letter public ? Is it right to treat 
such a charge with indifference ? Then, as to the letter published by 
Mr. Wells, can it be true that a member of the Floral Committee is 
allowed with impunity to utB'se his power as a Committeeman to collect 
his debt? Shall this be toic/ated by a “National Society?” and are 
these the methods which Mr. Dean is so proud of ? How comes it that 
several of the judges who adjudicate on the principal claims are 
Committeemen, and also members of the Floral Committee? Is this a 
“ National ” method ? We in the country prefer to have judges from a 
distance, and outside our provincial society. Pray do not think I 
