50 
JOURNAL OF RORTIGULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
Januarf 17,1896. 
there appeared to be an almost unanimous feeling in favour of the show 
being held at Beading in preference to Portsmouth. No application 
was received from Portsmouth until November 29th. — Edward 
Mawley, Hon. Secretary. 
National Bose Society. 
We are requested to publish the following resolution, passed unani¬ 
mously by the Committee of the National Bose Society on Tuesday, the 
16th inst., “ That the Committee of the National Bose Society, having 
had under consideration the statements lately made in the Journal of 
Horticulture, beg to express their unabated confidence in their two 
Honorary Secretaries, and endorse the action which they have taken as 
to the fixtures for 1896.” 
[This is received while our pages are being made up for press, and it 
settles the whole controversy.] 
Bosarians’ Differences. 
If it were not that the discussions which so freely crop up in the 
pages of the Journal of Horticulture in relation to Boses and their 
exhibitions, evidence so much of the frailty of human nature, many 
readers might regard them as interesting or amusing. Why association 
with the Bose should create such singular divergences of opinion even 
on I the most trivial matters as Bose correspondence discloses, is one 
of those things no “fellah” outside the amateur rosarian circle can 
understand. I specially note that these sharp and often acrid discussions 
are shared in by amateur growers and exhibitors alone. Men in 
the trade wisely and carefully hold aloof. Probably they, consisting 
so much more largely of practical business men, and perhaps too of 
philosophers, find nothing to differ about, and prefer to live har¬ 
moniously. Somehow it would seem as if the flower was the 
portion of the trade, and the amateurs enjoyed only the spines. 
We do not find Chrysanthemum or Dahlia, or Auricula, or Carnation 
growers girding at each other in the way that rosarians do ; and 
therefore we are driven to the conclusion that it must be the thorn of 
their favourite flower which excites their temperaments. They appear, 
too, to make such a great “to do” over small things, that it seems 
somewhat venturesome to indite a column in the pages of the Journal 
concerning Bose exhibitions or the N.B.S., so I content myself with a 
“short and sweet” par, or I might be “in for” a “taste of the 
briar.”— An Outsider. 
Current Questions. 
I AM pleased to receive “ Gleaner’s ” apology, though I cannot call 
it a well-grown specimen, shown in “ the most perfect phase of possible 
beauty.” He says (page 37), “ There seems to be a certain amount of 
danger in tilting with men who are under the gentle influence of the 
Bose.” Well, if “tilting” means representing a man as saying something 
worse than foolish, which happens to be the exact opposite of what he 
did say (“ sorry I spoke ” of course referred to my resignation as com¬ 
mitteeman), it is well to be reminded that Boses have thorns, though 
they do not scratch unless assaulted. 
It is not necessary to occupy the valuable space of the Journal of 
Horticulture by pointing out the difference of “hearsay” evidence from 
what is heard with a person’s own ears; and the extraordinary para¬ 
graphs of “ Gleaner ” on this subject may be left unanswered. 
“ J. B.’s ” suggestion (page 35) as to the addition of gold medals to 
the champion trophies is, as the Editorial note says, worthy of considera¬ 
tion. It may, however, be urged that past winners have something to 
show—viz., their names in the list of the N.B.S. Beport, and graven on 
the trophies themselves. And also, that if carried out it would be rather 
hard on those who are now past winners, particularly, on anyone who, 
like a great friend of mine, has held one of the trophies once, but sees 
very little prospect of repeating his triumph. I think that the whole 
of the value of the gold medal should be deducted from the money prize ; 
and, if this were agreed on, it might be added that any past winner 
might buy as many gold medals as he had won trophies. This would be 
fair to all, and would leave little objection to the suggestion offered._ 
W. E. Eaillem. 
May Frosts. 
I WOULD strongly commend to “ E. M. D.” (page 15) the course of 
procedure which has already seemed to him the wisest in the case of 
severe May frost. I think he will find that Mr, Grahame was subse¬ 
quently inclined to think he had been rather too precipitate, A week 
of growing weather will often make a considerable difference in the 
general appearance of the plants ; sometimes for the better, but oftener 
for the worse. Still, it is generally impossible to tell how far the 
injury has extended till the plants begin to grow again, and a slight 
stimulant, with plenty of hoeing is desirable, to make the plants start 
again and show where they are alive, as soon as possible. 
The just-formed buds are the most liable to be injured ; those that 
have got hard can stand a litile frost, but very few of the buds which 
are in existence at the time of a frost strong enough to kill any of the 
leaves are likely to come to any good. The shoots that have not formed 
buds will be all right if they have not been “stopped”—that is, if they 
grow again from the extreme tip as they did before—even if several of 
the leaves have been destroyed. A shoot that has been stopped and 
breaks from the side buds only is not likely to produce show flowers 
that season, but it should be cut back to the topmost strong pushing 
bud, and restricted to that growth only, 
I recommend preventive measures by study of the thermometer with 
local weather experience; and, when danger signals are clearly dis¬ 
played, turning out all hands, by lamplight if necessary, to lightly cover 
with anything or everything that may be handy—muslin, green boughs, 
or even newspapers. For remedial measures, I quite think, as above, 
that patience is the only thing for the first week or so. I am not quite 
certain on this point, and am always ready to learn ; but not, in this 
case only, by experience.—W. E. Baillem. 
Do Money Prizes Tend to Demoralise? 
In your columns recently, and also in the new issue of the 
“ Bosarian’s Year Book,” Mr. C. J. Grahame raises the question of the 
advisability of exhibiting Boses for money prizes—that it tends to 
demoralise the exhibitors. It seems to me that Mr. Grahame is mis- 
takinga symptom for the disease. The question is a much larger one and 
altogether different. Nor do I think the symptom to be anything like as 
bad as he believes it. 
My experience as a Bose exhibitor was very short and very pleasant. 
It extended over some four years, including local shows of more or less 
importance, and one of the N.B.S., and I am still in touch with the 
shows of the latter. I never met with anything but kind con¬ 
sideration and assistance at the hands of my fellow exhibitors. They 
would always advise me as to how to improve my box, would lend me their 
watering cans in case of need, and, if I were short of time, would help 
me to stage. This, too, frequently by persons whom I had never met 
before. The love of the Bose was a suflScient introduction and bond and 
claim on their services. 
Nor was it that they felt my blooms were not to be respected, for, 
out of the nine boxes I have staged five have won first prizes, two 
second, and one third. I distinctly did not, under these circumstances, 
find the competitors, to quote Mr. Grahame, “ probably as disagreeable as 
is possible when prospects are not rosy.” This is the first time I have 
advertised myself, and I could not do it now were it not that the 
record is an important factor in gauging the goodwill of Bose exhibitors. 
I have, however, had a long experience—eighteen years—^in a much 
larger field of competition—rifle shooting. There certain competitions 
have money prizes; others articles. The “ frame of mind,” the 
“ discord,” referred to by Mr. Grahame were certainly present here as 
they are in Bose showing, but whether a ten-pound note, or a clock, or 
a cup was the prize, made not the slightest difference. Nor did the 
money prize prevent a like show of courtesy to that above referred to. 
To take only one instance, the last time I shot at Wimbledon I was 
squadded at 600 yards in the competition for the Queen’s prize with a 
man whom I have never met before or since. Observing that I had no 
telescope to note the exact position of my shots on the target he offered 
me his, and we used it alternately throughout. At the end of that 
competition I had won £5. 
No! Exhibitors and competitors have been sore at timei and 
always will be, let the guerdon be what it may. Let pride of position 
alone be the prize, and the case will not be altered. But the soreness 
is little more than skin deep, and with nearly everybody soon passes 
away, and looking deeper we find sincere and hearty greetings whenever 
and wherever the competitors may meet, and the formation of lasting 
friendships. Human nature is not so bad as it is painted, and human 
nature is what Mr. Grahame is tilting at.— Arcanum. 
Musings. 
“The time has come to speak of many things.”—(“Alice in Wonderland.”)] 
So says the walrus in that charming book both for youngsters and 
children of a larger growth, and indeed the contents of Nos. 1 and 2 of 
our Journal for 1895 will probably induce many of us, at least those 
those who may be afliicted with the cacoethes scriiendi, to write when 
they cannot speak. I am not on all points agreed with Mr. 0. J. 
Grahame, although we were fellow tilters at the B .se analysis. I like 
the noms de plume. I like the effort to find out the who’s who, and to 
tack together the writer and his nom de plume. I must confess I have 
failed egregiously in “ W. B. Baillem.’' Why, I know not, certainly not 
from any bulls in his writings. I had pictured our friend as a resident 
in the Green Isle. I am glad to find out my mistake, and to learn that 
“ W. E. Baillem ” is much nearer home, and so the hope rises that one 
of these days we may meet and know each other in the flesh. Eosey 
friends may have their storms and perhaps their thorns, but after all 
some of my dearest friendships have been made through the queen of 
flowers, and so I put up willingly with a thorny puncture now and again. 
Surely one such letter as those of Mr. A. F. Grace is sufficient ta 
show the necessity of settling what is meant by an amateur. Like 
“ W. B. Eaillem,” I utterly fail to see that the division into classes by 
fixing a certain number of plants has anything to do with the rule that 
an amateur must not sell Boses or buds. I have already hinted at the 
possibility of this numerical test being evaded, and it seems to me 
patent that the persons who would evade the selling test, as Mr. A. F. 
Grace seems to imply many do, are the very persons who would be 
likely to do the other. What, I would ask, should be the true feelings 
of a gentleman ? Surely not to join a society the rules of which he 
knows, and then deliberately to set those rules at defiance. I confess 
that the numerical matter is one that is not qui^e so easv to settle. 
I apprehend most of us amateurs, if asked straight off how many plants 
we possessed, would under-estimate the number—not wilfully perhaps ; 
but, then, in the moment of victory the temptation is greater, and the 
conqueror is apt enough to lessen the numbers of his couquering troop, 
and augment those he has vanquished. I was once judging at a Bose 
exhibition, and chaffed the gardener of a friend on exhibiting with 
