34 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
January IQ, 18 5S. 
about 55° to G0°. A fair degree of temperature such as I have mentioned 
is necessary to flower it, although the plant will live through the winter 
in ordinary greenhouse temperature ; but under such treatment we 
failed to flower it, and it was not until it was moved to its present 
position two years ago that anything satisfactory was done with it. It 
flowered the following year and again this year about the same time— 
Christmas. It is by no means particular as to soil, but a good friable 
loam seems to suit it best. 
“ It is easily propagated in the usual way, either by cuttings or seeds, 
which, judging from what I have seen of it, are produced rather freely ; 
but cuttings inserted round the edges of a pot in sandy soil and placed 
in a propagating frame root in a few weeks, and if potted and 
liberally treated may be expected to flower in about a year, much 
depending on the time of year at which the cuttings were inserted. As 
far as I am aware, this is the first and only plant which has flowered in 
England—possibly in Europe—and is not yet, I believe, in the trade; 
Sir George Macleay having brought the plant to England when 
travelling abroad a few years ago.” 
HOME FOR THE HOLIDAYS. 
Ameeican Methods. 
Holidays in the home gardening world are perforce of circum¬ 
stances connected with the work of the festive season not very common, 
and a trip of some 3000 miles to see the “ old folks at home ” is less 
common still. It is perhaps worth recording with a few notes derived 
from a young gardener who two years since set out for “ the West ” to 
find work, dollars, and new ideas in a Boston nursery. He appears to 
have won a considerable moiety of each, and of the latter I was 
particularly interested in. This—the working experience—was confined 
to Roses and Chrysanthemums grown for cut blooms in the Waban Rose 
Conservatories, Natick, Mass., seventeen miles inland from Boston, 
U.S.A. About 40,000 Roses are grown in thirty-five houses, varying in 
length from 100 to 350 feet, and from 18 to 50 feet wide. These houses 
are heated by steam, and particular attention appears to be given in the 
matter of temperature, airing, and watering. The principal varieties 
grown are—Teas, Catherine Mermet, The Bride, and Bridesmaid; 
Hybrid Teas, Meteor and American Beauty ; H.P.’s, Ulrich Brunner and 
Gbn^ral Jacqueminot. These are planted out in shallow beds of soil of 
but a few inches in depth, resting on benches of timber raised from the 
ground to a convenient height for working operations. Stimulant in 
the form of bonemeal is liberally supplied, and the whole of the plants 
are cleared out annually, and new stock reared from cuttings in reserve 
houses take their place. 
Some 12.000 Chrysanthemums are planted out in three large houses 
about mid-June. These are grown oii single stems only for one big 
bloom. Addition of new varieties is made each season. Cutting for the 
Boston market, where all the flowers grown here are consigned, 
commences about October 20th, and finishes the first week of December. 
Having some vague notions of the tropical heat summer commands in 
this part of the globe, this question of growing Chrysanthemums planted 
out under glass is, to say the least, interesting. I was also gratified by 
some cuttings which my enthusiastic young friend brought with him, 
accompanied by the compliment that “ the boss” who gave them to him 
said, “Now, I guess you’ll give these to some old fogey over there who 
will not root them till next summer.” But of that nous verrons. 
Eugene Dailledouze is amongst those sent, and my visitor said it is 
superior to Golden Wedding. Forty-five dollars per month is the 
nursery pay; but it was easy to glean that a good deal of energy and 
close attention to duty under extremes of climate is required in 
exchange. Still, my young friend, when asked if he would care to 
remain on this side, said, “ Wal, I guess not; it is rather too slow.” 
Hence be returns to “the West,” and I think he might do worse. 
—E. K., Duiliii. 
DIFFICULTIES IN EXHIBITING—PROPOSED COURT 
OP APPEAL. 
I AM surprised that nobody has responded to the kind invitation you 
gave in your issue of 13th December to discuss the above subject in your 
columns. Perhaps “ everybody has been waiting for somebody else to 
begin.” I have advocated for some years the appointment of appeal 
judges for our agricultural, horticultural, and other shows as the only 
means of putting an end to disputes and closing the mouths of inveterate 
grumblers who never get fair play (?) 
There are many people in the world who think it a very great honour 
to be appointed to adjudicate at a show of any kind, and will accept an 
appointment and the responsibility connected therewith although they 
know little or nothing about the subjects they have to judge. There are 
others again, who are themselves keen competitors, that are very anxious 
to be taken out as judges, not so much for the empty honour of the post 
as to be in a position to help those who will help them. If the work of these 
gentlemen was subject to be reversed by appeal judges the first set 
would not in many cases accept the responsibility, and the second would 
be very chary of deviating from the straight line lest an aggrieved party 
might appeal, wdth result of their decisions being reversed and their 
shortcomings exposed. 
To work the appeal court without unduly prolonging the misery it 
would be necessary to have the appeal judges in a room or tent con¬ 
venient to the building or marquee in which the show was held, and to 
allow the competitors to remain in the show during the judging ready to 
lodge their appeals as soon as each class was judged, or if there was not 
room in the place where the show was held to call in the competitors in 
each class as soon as the judges gave their decision. To prevent whole¬ 
sale appeals it would be necessary, as proposed by Mr. Crabbe, to require 
each appellant to make a deposit—say the value of the prize claimed if 
it did not exceed half a guinea ; I think any higher sum would be likely 
to deter many competitors who really had a grievance from seeking an 
appeal. If an appeal was successful the appellant would get back his 
deposit, and of course get the prize claimed, and if not the deposit would 
be forfeited and go to the funds of the society. 
The greatest difficulty in working the appeal system would be in the 
event of the judges awarding an exhibit the first prize which should not 
have been in the running at all. For instance, if the appeal system had 
been in operation at the Royal Caledonian Horticultural Society’s show 
of September last, where the judging of the Fancy Pansies took every¬ 
body by surprise, the first prize being awarded to a tray that I may 
safely say none of the competitors, not even the owner of it, ever dreamt 
of it getting a prize. In that case there certainly would have been two 
or three appellants. Say that three ’nad appealed against the decision 
of the judges, and all claimed the first prize, they could not all have 
been successful—that is, they could not all have got the first prize, but 
if the appeal court adjudged the exhibits of all the three appellants 
better than the one that was awarded the first prize by the first set of 
judges, and awarded them the first, second, and third prizes, all three 
should be equally entitled to have their deposits returned. 
Some people affect to believe that there is no such thing as favouritism 
or partiality with judges, but it is one of the worst features of our show 
system. The good grower will not often succumb to the cadger, and if 
he does at a time, he often does not know whether the “stuff” that 
beat his was honestly shown or not, and it is said that what a man does 
not know does him no harm, but how shocked he is when he suffers an 
unmerited defeat at the hands of dishonest or incompetent judges, and 
has no remedy.—C. K., Gargannoch. 
[This letter opens out a new view of the subject that was introduced, 
and a very wide one, as it appears to suggest a reserve set of judges for 
every show. Would they not all want to be in the appeal reserve ?] 
MR. BLACKMORE’S CRITICS. 
Does not “Landowner” (page 586) with all other of Mr. R. D. 
Blackmore’s critics, make the mistake of regarding that eminent writer’s 
fruit references too seriously ? It seems to be overlooked that Mr. 
Blackmore owes his high reputation, not to fruit at all, but to books ; 
that he is a distinguished romancist, and as such it is difficult for him 
to avoid investing, what to most persons may seem to be a very prosaic 
theme, with a certain amount of romance. Very much of allowance 
has to made for that feature in Mr. Blackmore’s fruit criticisms ; it is, 
indeed, a case where the proverbial grain of salt looms large. Now, so 
far from being regarded as a practical grower of fruit for sale, Mr. 
Blackmore is really a fruit experimentalist, and he has chiefly devoted 
himself to Pears, which seem to be pomologically—I do not say profitably 
—his favourite fruit; and there are few varieties known to commerce, 
especially of French sorts, that he has not grown and tested at Teddington. 
It is obvious that work of this kind cannot be undertaken profit¬ 
ably, not even by a nurseryman. It is all speculative and experimental, 
and its reward is found in the great fund of information it furnishes, 
whilst to an earnest pomologist experimental work of this kind is ever 
attended with profound interest and pleasure. No doubt Mr. Blackmore 
has found, as others have found, that two-thirds of the Pears he has 
tested have been worthless, and in that respect alone the Teddington 
trials have perhaps been as useful for horticulture as they may have 
been, in another sense, profitable to some traders. Let it be said that 
neither in soil nor situation is Teddington an ideal place for hardy Pear 
culture. It is flat, not far from the Thames, and on the stiff London 
clay, and all experience has served to show that these are far from being 
the best of cultural conditions. 
The Thames Valley soil, though growing trees very well up to a 
certain age, is very apt to produce weak sappy wood, engendering canker 
and non-fertile buds later, hence the older Pear trees become the less 
profitable they are. Mr. Blackmore has most of his trees somewhat 
densely planted, much more so than is ordinarily the case, especially 
where under fruits are grown in conjunction. Many of the trees have 
run up freely to a great height, and it is obvious that unless the ground 
be more abundantly fed the supply of food must be rapidly exhausted. 
Practically the trees largely may be said to be free pyramids run wild, 
for they have that aspect, and whilst sometimes cropping heavily, it is 
doubtful whether there are not far too many varieties, and probably 
much of the fruit far from being first-class. I cannot answer, nor am 
I entitled to answer, the queries which a “ Landowner ” so practically 
puts. He is not content to be put off with generalities. No doubt a 
visit to the Pear gardens, I think some 7 acres in extent, would furnish 
the best information and test how far, as a certain peer remarked the 
other day, Mr. Blackmore was entitled to the dignity of being the largest 
fruit grower in the kingdom. For that silly remark, however, a peer 
and not Mr. Blackmore is responsible. 
Let it be clearly understood that hardy fruit culture as conducted 
at Teddington, 'oears no more relation to fruit culture on practical 
market lines than does a picture shop to the National Gallery, No 
