October 13, 1892. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
321 
“/DIME'S tyrannic sway ” deals hardly with workers in the great 
J- field of horticulture, and with the material that their hands 
had fashioned, for the gardener is called away from his sphere of 
love and labour, while the flower gives place to an improved rival ; 
but, safely enshrined in the records of horticultural progress, 
literary contributions live on to afford instruction and delight to 
succeeding generations. Few—save those who have turned over 
with a reverent and sympathetic hand the pages of the past, making 
imaginary headway against the fleeting tide of time, and living 
for a few hours with the gardeners and writers of fifty years ago— 
can realise how much we owe to our fathers’ teaching. What if, 
in some cases, the style appears quaint and stilted ? The germ of 
good was there, and, far from smiling at the stately cadences, we 
should see nothing but what is admirable in the literary work of 
the gardeners whose labours to clothe their thoughts in clear and 
intelligible language was not aided by the early education which 
is now enjoyed. As for the leaders of the circle of writers who 
flourished fifty years ago, their work speaks of sound knowledge, 
ripe judgment, and a literary skill not surpassed at the present 
time. When G. W. Johnson, Donald Beaton, Robert Fish, and 
R. Errington were writing in the Cottage Gardener horticultural 
literature was in its brightest phase, and it is not too much to say 
that the marked ability which characterises the writings of the 
present school of gardeners i3 the fruit of the example set 
by those brilliant men. They were by no means alone. Good 
work was done by many others, and a general high level was 
reached, the maintenance of which has given horticultural 
literature the highest place amongst that of special industries. 
Apart, too, from the regular contributors to the gardening 
periodicals there have been contributions of great value from others 
to whom writing has been a pastime pursued in the leisure 
moments of busy business lives—stray leaves scattered in this 
quarter and that, but all helping to enrich the general store of 
knowledge. Of such are the essays, articles, and lectures written 
and delivered over a period of fifty years by Mr. William Paul, 
and the most important of which he has, by a happy inspiration, 
gathered together and published in a handsome and beautifully 
printed volume, 0 thus bringing into compact compass the scattered 
fragments of one of the most cultured horticulturists of our day. 
Wm. Paul wrote when Beaton did, and his firm bright intellect 
still delights us. The 562 pages of the volume before us are a 
record of practical knowledge, taste, and literary skill of no 
common kind, and the highest praise that can be bestowed on the 
book is to say that many of the chapters read as freshly as they did 
thirty, forty, or fifty years ago. The volume, which i3 dedicated to 
Dr. Hogg “ as a mark of respect and esteem arising from a lifelong 
friendship” is divided into three parts, the first being devoted to 
Roses, the second to trees and plants, and the third to fruit culture 
and miscellanea. Mr. William Paul’s eminence as a rosarian gives 
a special interest to the opening part, but as a horticulturist of 
considerable all-round knowledge, a calm thinker, and a man of 
taste and culture there is no chapter in the book that has not 
weight, value, and significance. It would appear that forty-nine 
years have elapsed since Mr. Paul’s first communication on Roses 
*Contributions to Horticultural literature, 1818-1692, by William Paul. Published 
by W. Paul & Son, Waltham Cross. 
No. 642 .—Vol. XXV., Third Series. 
was published, this consisting of an article contributed to the 
“ Gardeners’ Chronicle,” then edited by Dr. Lindley, on Roses in 
pots, and it was followed by others, these proving the then young 
writer to possess far more than a smattering of the practical know¬ 
ledge which he displayed in dealing with the same subject later in 
life, and which, it may be noted, he has made peculiarly his own. 
One of the most interesting points of the chapter is to observe how 
widely lists of varieties varied from their present character. The 
change gives an idea of the great progress which has been made in 
the time that has elapsed since the article was written. For 
instance, the list of Hybrid Perpetuals recommended by Mr. Paul 
comprised nineteen, not one of which is in general cultivation now. 
Their names are as follows :— 
“ Aubernon, Clementine Duval, Comte de Paris, Coquette de 
Montmorency, Dr. Marx, Due d’Aumale, Duchess of Sutherland, 
Edward Jesse, Fulgorie, General Merlin, Lady Alice Peel, Louis 
Bonaparte, Madame Laffay, Mrs. Elliot, Prince of Wales, Prudence 
Roeser, Princesse Helene, Queen Victoria, Rivers.” 
Almost as much might be said of the Teas :— 
“ Adam, Arcbiduchesse Therese, Barbot, Belle Archinto, 
Bougere, Bride of Abydos, Caroline, Comte de Paris, Devoniensis, 
Don” Carlos, Elise Sauvage, Eugene Desgaches, Fragoletta, Gou- 
bault, Hamon, Julie Mansais, Madame Roussell, Josephine Malton, 
Moiret, Niphetos, Nina, Pactolus, Prince d’Esterhazy, Safrano, 
Taglioni.” 
Out of these, four—namely, Adam, Devoniensis, Niphetos, and 
Safrano, are still widely grown, and the last two are considered 
nearly indispensable. There could be no stronger tribute to their 
intrinsic excellence than the fact that the labours of fifty years 
in the improvement of this beautiful class have left their 
positions still impregnable. The train of thought suggested by 
this consideration of new and old varieties is carried further 
by the chapter on a trip to Paris in search of autumnal Roses 
in 1844. 
“ The History and Cultivation of the Rose ” (page 21-42) forms 
one of the most complete, interesting, and valuable chapters in the 
book. It was delivered as a lecture to the Stamford Hill, Clapton, 
and Stoke Newington Gardeners’ Association in 1845. “Who,” 
says Mr. Paul, “ were the first people to bring this flower from 
its natural habitat to be a dweller in cultivated grounds must ever 
be a matter of conjecture.” He thinks, however, that it attracted 
notice at a very early period. That its great beauty has always 
given it a prominent position, even from the earliest times, is 
proved by the many references to it by the early writers, such as 
Theocritus, Homer, Sappho, Anacreon, Pliny, and Suetonius. 
Moreover, it has always stood as the symbol of floral beauty, 
appealing to poets and prose writers of all nations. Among those 
who have sung of it in the English tongue the author mentions 
Chaucer, Spenser, Shakespeare, Beaumont, Milton, Byron, Moore, 
Cowper, and Mrs. Hemans—a truly noble throng. 
The first foreign Rose introduced into this country was, he 
tells us, the Damask, Rosa damascena, which came in 1573. The 
year 1596 is given as the period of introduction of the Provence 
(R. centifolia), the Moss (R. centifolia muscosa), the French 
(R. gallica), the Musk (R. moschata), and the Austrian (R. lutea), 
while R. alba followed in the succeeding year. “ Here,” said Mr. 
Paul forty-seven years ago, with an excursion into the realms of 
prophecy that time has abundantly justified, “ were the progenitors 
of several of the most popular Roses of the present day brought 
to our shores at about the same period. Beautiful as they no 
doubt were then considered, highly as they would be prized by the 
scientific in those matters, who could have dived so far into the 
ocean of futurity as to foresee that from these species would spring 
forth the admirable varieties we at present possess? But we 
know it has been so, and in contemplating still further improve¬ 
ments by the process of hybridisation, what extensive prospects 
open upon our view ? The field for experiment is boundless, and 
No. 2298 -Vol. LXXXVII., Old Series. 
