358 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ October 20, 1892. 
they touch each other. It is true, as Mr. Davis also says, that only two 
blooms on a 12-board touch each other at all four points, bat six more 
touch at three points, while the corner blooms touch at two. This alone 
is quite sufficient to impede satisfactory judging. It must be remem¬ 
bered that judges rarely have more time, generally less, than they 
require for the proper discharge of their functions, and it is impossible 
for many reasons that they should lift every bloom from the “ general 
conglomerate mass of interlacing petals,” which is almost the correct way 
of describing a modern show-stand in the smaller classes. Everything 
ought to he so arranged that the judges can, with the least expenditure 
of time and trouble, satisfy themselves as to how far each individual 
flower realises, or falls short of, those essentials of diameter, depth, and 
solidity which go to make up the perfect show bloom. And this becomes 
the more important in face of the growing demand that, in all close and 
important competitions, each individual bloom should be “ pointed up.” 
That a striking consensus of opinion on the part of a large number 
of the leading exhibitors, to the effect that the present regulation show- 
board is insufficient for the proper exhibition of such giants as Etoile de 
Lyon and its white sport Lilian Cope, Viviand Morel, E. Molyneux, 
et hoc genus ovine, was brought to light by Mr. R. Falconer Jameson’s 
circular letter, few will be disposed to deny. But the argument has 
been brought forward by the worthy Vice-Chairman of the Committee 
of the National Chrysanthemum Society, that to enforce the use of 
larger boards would be “ practically legislating for the few at the 
expense of the many.” And he proceeds, that “ whilst it is perfectly 
true that a few of our most successful exhibitors find the regulation 
boards too small, it is an undoubted fact that they are quite large 
enough for an overwhelming majority of those who show Japanese 
blooms.” Now, I think that it might be replied that even were it con¬ 
ceded that the existing board is large enough for the majority of those 
who merely show Japanese Chrysanthemums, that fact is entirely beside 
the practical question, if it be also the fact—and I think it is—that the 
board is not large enough for those who take the prizes. In other 
words, the question at issue practically concerns, and only concerns, 
those who, with more or less regularity, make their appearance in the 
prize lists. For the larger number who, throughout the country, show, 
but never, or rarely, take prizes, and who go to make up Mr. Jukes’ 
“ overwhelming majority,” are, I would submit, unaffected in any real 
sense by the change which it is proposed to make ; nor can it be fairly 
said that it would be at their expense. 
It may be true, as Mr. Jukes puts it, that “small blooms on a board 
too large for them are much less effective than massive blooms on a 
small board,” and that the former condition of affairs is calculated to 
“ spoil the effect of the exhibit.” But we must remember that the 
substantial object in view is not the “ effect of the exhibit ” of those 
who have no chance at all of taking a prize, but the satisfaction of the 
requirements of those between whom the issue of first, second, and third 
prize must rest. The exhibitor who in no event can hope for a prize in 
the class in which he competes can scarcely ask that facilities for 
accurate judgment of the leading stands shall be withheld simply 
because their adoption would damage the “ effect ” of his own exhibit. 
Considerations of mere sentiment must give way to those of practical 
utility. And, I would ask, Does it accord with our experience that 
only a few of our most successful exhibitors find the regulation boards 
too small ? ” The quality of the exhibits of many, if not most, of 
those who figure in the prize lists at the chief shows throughout the 
country is fairly well known to me, and I must say that I think that in 
nearly every case a larger board would have more adequately displayed 
their exhibits. To my mind, the necessity for some enlargement of the 
existing regulation board in the interest of a sufficiently large propor¬ 
tion of the successfully competing exhibitors throughout the country 
has been demonstrated, and I would now pass to a consideration of 
possible objections to a change on other grounds. 
First we have that of expense. That some expense will attend the 
change is undoubted, but that objection, real and reasonable as it is, 
within certain limits, must not prevail to arrest a needed reform. We 
must not spoil showing altogether because of the expense of rendering 
that showing satisfactory and effective. Boards and boxes wear out, 
and whether a “ period of eption ” for a season or two, leading to an 
after period of “compulsory uniformity” might be conceded to meet 
this point, might perhaps be a matter for the Committee of the National 
Chrysanthemum Society ; but unless the objection be found to be very 
pressing it would certainly be desirable to give immediate effect to any 
change which may be decided on. Portability is a real objection so far 
as it goes; but, again, not of sufficient weight, per se, to be set off 
against the major consideration of a proper exhibition of the flowers. 
The substantial end cannot be sacrificed to mere consideration of detail. 
Besides a reasonable and probably sufficient measure of reform may not, 
after all, so greatly affect the question of portability as some assume. 
Next, a greater inroad on the space available at the places of exhibition. 
A substantial objection, but one which it seems to me must be met 
rather by a limitation of the number of classes where absolutely neces¬ 
sary, than by the sacrifice of the quality of the judging all through the 
show, for it amount to that if it be once conceded that the increase in 
the size of the show-boards is necessary. And besides the small increase 
which may be found necessary, and that perhaps in Japanese only, 
would, on the assumption that the Japanese exhibited are equal in 
number to all the other sections taken together, only mean some 3 inches 
to a yard of space on the stage. Not so very much after all. 
A la9t objection—“ Mixed classes ” would look very awkward. Some 
think not, but that the irregularity which already exists where incurved 
are shown side by side with Japanese Chrysanthemums would be 
scarcely noticeably increased by a slight addition made to the size of 
the Japanese board. Others are of opinion that if the suggested 
alteration should lead to the abolition of “mixed classes” altogether 
so much the better. An opinion which, I must confess, I am inclined 
to share. Reviewing the various objections which have been urged 
against an enlargement of the regulation board I think that the con¬ 
clusion must be, that although some of them have a measure of weight 
they altogether fail to supply a sufficient reason for withholding the 
reform which is called for. What then shall be the dimensions of our 
new regulation Japanese show-board 1 Looking at the necessity for 
some enlargement, and giving all due weight to the objections which I 
have enumerated, I should say that an increase of 1 inch—namely, 
from 6 to 7 inches between the holes, centre to centre—would reason¬ 
ably satisfy the requirements of the case. Whether it would be 
necessary to have a margin, back and front, of full 3^ inches is a 
moot question. Those who have boxes rather larger than their stands 
would find 3 inches sufficient, and less space would be taken on the 
show table. But this is a detail merely. 
Some restriction of the system of allowing duplicates would also 
tend to keep the “ giants ” in their places, and allow that relief to the 
space which is afforded by the smaller varieties; and a regulation 
limiting the diameter of the cup, or disc of card or wire, by which the 
blooms are extended beyond the position of natural growth, would also 
help matters. It is, of course, possible that were there no such counter¬ 
vailing considerations as those which I have noticed, even a larger 
increase than I have suggested might be found desirable ; but in this 
matter compromise must come in, and the spirit of moderation should 
direct our counsels. We shall doubtless hear the opinions of many practical 
exhibitors, and to the united wisdom and experience of the meeting we 
can safely leave the decision of the exact size of the future board, but 
this I would suggest : let that size be settled upon some definite 
principle, and do not let the point depend upon the average of a number 
of different suggestions ; otherwise reasonable proposals may be 
altogether negatived and swamped by someone’s altogether preposterous 
suggestion—like the 40-inch by 30-inch board for twelve blooms, as pro¬ 
posed by one of his correspondents in answer to the circular of Mr. 
Falconer Jameson. 1 am confident that, whatever be the result of the 
conference, its decision will be heartily endorsed and loyally observed 
by all true lovers of the Chrysanthemum. 
Stands for Exhibiting Japanese Blooms. 
BY MR. R. FALCONER JAMESON. 
In connection with the question of size of stands for exhibiting 
Japanese blooms, there are two main points to consider : First, whether 
it is desirable to increase the present standard size ? Secondly, if the 
first question be answered in the affirmative, how much should the size 
be increased ? I take it for granted that the general feeling would be 
almost unanimously in favour of the size being enlarged but for the 
expense which would be entailed upon exhibitors. The Executive of 
the National Chrysanthemum Society have themselves, for a long time 
past, admitted that an enlargement is desirable by allowing Japs to be 
shown on boards of any size. In this I think they have made a great 
mistake. Had they, instead of allowing boards of any size, stipulated 
for an alternative size specified by them, the change would have been, 
to a great extent, effected ere now and without any burden having been 
cast upon exhibitors. 
Who will be so bold as to assert that Japs show to better advantage 
crushed up one against another, or overlapping one another, than if 
standing just clear all round ? There is beauty of form to be considered 
as well as beauty of colour, and the former essential is lost when the 
flowers are crushed out of shape. How, I ask, would incurved blooms 
look if jammed up one against another 1 and what applies to incurves 
applies also to Japs. Does any gardener, in planting shrubs, arrange 
them overlapping one another ? I trow not; he allows a clear space 
round each one, and if in course of time they increase in size to such an 
extent as to mar their beauty, he then thins them out. 
Personally I deprecate any sudden compulsory change being made, but 
I suggest, as I have already done in the press, that the National Chrys¬ 
anthemum Society should, for the present, allow exhibitors the option of 
using one of two sizes, either the present standard size, or a larger one 
about to be specified. I feel convinced that if this were done the 
good sense of exhibitors would lead them to gradually change to the 
larger size, which, in course of a short time, might be made com¬ 
pulsory without putting exhibitors to great expense. Some will argue 
that two sizes of boards would destroy uniformity on the show tables, 
but they must not forget that as at present any size is allowed there is 
chaos rather than uniformity. 
I will now pass to the question of what size should be substituted for 
the present one. In January last I published the result of replies 
received in response to a letter I had addressed to some of the leading 
growers asking their opinions. Out of the thirty-eight replies I received, 
only two were in favour of the present size being retained, the others 
voting as follows : One 27 inches by 18 inches, one 27 inches by 
20 inches, one 27 inches by 21 inches, two 28 inches by 20 inches, eight 
28 inches by 21 inches, six 28 inches by 22 inches, one 30 inches by 
21 inches, one 30 inches by 22 inches, one 30 inches by 22\ inches, two 
30 inches by 24 inches, one 31 inches by 21 inches, four 32 inches by 
24 inches, and two still larger. Of the remainder some do not specify 
dimensions, while others made various suggestions. It will thus be seen 
that more are in favour of 28 inches by 21 inches than of any other size, 
