32 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
January 11, 1894. 
greater depth than 2 feet, so the supply is necessarily limited; 
for it would be difficult to estimate how long these beds have taken 
to form, and unfortunately in some cases large extents have been 
destroyed by firing the drying fronds in autumn or winter, for it 
would smoulder until useless. Some of the largest supplies of 
excellent peat have been for some time obtained from Hampshire, 
especially in the Eingwood district, where two dealers (both regular 
advertisers in this Journal) have their depots—namely, Messrs. 
Epps & Co. and Mr. G. H. Richards. I have dealt with these 
firms, and have no preference, for both are trustworthy. There 
is a great demand for the best Orchid peat, and many estate 
owners may possess miniature gold mines in this way, of 
which they are quite unaware, and it is worth anyone’s while to 
endeavour to discover fresh supplies of saleable material when soil 
produce is at such a discount.— Orciiidist. 
(To be continued.) 
Incurved Japanese Chrysanthemums. 
In reply to “ Beginner ” (page 6), he will notice I did not answer 
his first note until I was quite satisfied he had wrongfully accused the 
winner of the first-prize stand exhibiting unfairly. “ Beginner ” had 
not then written to say he had made a mistake. If L6on Frache and 
Mdlle. Marie Hoste were included in either of the prizewinning stands 
we must have overlooked them, and I very much regret that the mistake 
was made, but of course we are quite as liable to make mistakes as 
“ Beginner.” For the future I would advise your correspondent to care¬ 
fully look through the competing stands, and if not showing according to 
schedule enter a protest before the judging is finished, also before 
rushing into print to be more careful not to accuse any one exhibitor ; 
the mistake, if any was made, would then be more promptly cleared up, 
—Edwin Beckett. 
Judges and Judging. 
I HAVE been very much interested in reading the opinions of your 
various correspondents on the above subject. I am in full accord with 
Mr. E. Molyneux (page 629, last vol.) when he says, “The adjudicators 
should be in a position to give a reason for their decision ; ” but how 
seldom is this the case in rural shows—perhaps once in twenty times. 
Then again, if the judges are in a position to give a reason for their 
decision, and you ask them civilly to point out to you the difference, 
they either refuse to do it, or are very reluctant about the matter, and 
particularly if the questioner be an amateur or a young man who is 
desirous of improving himself. For many years I have advocated that 
after the awards are made at a show, the judges, exhibitors, and com¬ 
mittee meet together in conference, where the judges should be called 
upon to give an account of their stewardship. This method would 
minimise to a great extent the dissatisfaction of exhibitors. As an 
alternative to the above I should suggest that the class cards have, in 
addition to the exhibitor’s number, the qualities of the various products 
in their respective classes printed, with space provided for points. By 
this means we should gain a twofold object. In the first place we 
should satisfy the exhibitors, in the second place we should impart 
educational matter to visitors.—S. H. 
Judging at the Edinburgh Show. 
As one greatly interested in the discussion in the Journal oj Horti¬ 
culture I should like to bring a few facts before your readers bearing 
on the case, from I hope an entirely impartial point of view. In the 
first place the judges were men drawn from a wide area, nearly 100 miles 
apart, so absolute strangers to each other, occupying the positions of 
head gardeners in some of the best appointed gardens in the country, 
where the collections of Chrysanthemums have been famous for many 
years. Two of them acted as judges at several International Exhibi¬ 
tions held in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and most of the important shows held 
in different parts of the country for several years. Their decisions 
always gave great satisfaction, and even at this past show with this 
one exception. 
In looking over the Show they appeared to favour blooms with 
decided bright colours of rounded high build of moderate size; varieties 
difficult to get up seemed to tell with them if they were good specimens 
of their kind. This appeared to be the outstanding features of the 
first and second prize stands in the cup competition. The third and 
fourth prize stands consisted of much larger blooms of greater width, 
but rougher in outline and very dull colours. A few seemed to con¬ 
sider that these two stands should have been placed higher in the prize 
list on account of the size of the blooms ; but it was only the opinion 
of those who were not educated up to the idea that size alone does not 
constitute a meritorious bloom. This system of judging has been 
advocated by all the leading horticultural papers as well as the best 
judges in the south. The judges at Edinburgh are certainly to be con¬ 
gratulated upon the very decided step they took in this direction, and 
I shall expect to find blooms of more refinement staged next time ; but 
since your adverse criticism on the judges nobody knows hardly what 
to accept as to the correct system. 
The Committee have still some explanation to give anent not 
entertaining the protest, to some extent at least, or what was the 
reason that the cup was not presented to the winner on the platform 
at the opening of the show as this had always been done hitherto? 
“The expert” is a well known trade grower, but whose figures go to 
prove very little, as the blooms had been staged for nearly forty-eight 
hours before he pointed them, and after several thousand people had 
attended the Exhibition, causing dust to rise and fall and dull the 
bright colours of the blooms. The expert pointed the third prize stand 
very high in comparison with the others. 
I would advise the persons who entered their proteit in this case, as 
well as others who may find themselves defeated competitors at some 
future time, to refrain from rushing into print and exposing their 
grievances, for it serves no good purpose. They should learn to accept 
their defeat with good grace.— Robert Wood, Carnoustie. 
DECORATIVE BRITISH FERNS. 
The Harts-tongue. 
{Continued from page 7.) 
The common Harts-tongue Fern (Scolopendrium vulgare), though it 
contributes so largely to the vegetation of many of our British counties, 
lining the hedges and dotting the walls with myriads of its long strap¬ 
shaped fronds, is yet a member of an extremely small family which is 
only distinguished botanically from the Spleenworts (Asplenia) by its 
long lines of spore heaps being invariably formed of twm sori, or two 
lines instead of one, the twin crops of spores coalescing as they develop 
into one uniform sausage-shaped mass. The kinship of the species is 
best seen in the exotic Bird’s-nest Fern (Asp. nidus avis), whose broad, 
erect, simple fronds are exactly like gigantic Harts-tongues, to which the 
long lines of the spore heaps give an additional resemblance. The 
Harts-tongue is one of the few Ferns which adapt themselves both to 
growth in deep soil and at same time are quite at home in the dry 
chinks of walls and rocks, where its relatives, the Spleenworts, are also 
in their element. It is curious to note that in secluded damp places, 
where the air is always humid, its fronds will assume very vigorous 
and healthy growth, and a length of it may be a couple of feet, though 
the roots may be of the scantiest, and only sufficient to anchor the 
crown to the surface. On the other hand we may find it revelling in 
the hedge bottoms in ample leaf mould and with yard-long fronds or 
nestling in the chinks of a dry wall as tough little specimens only an 
inch or so across. It will be noted, however, that all these situations 
imply thorough drainage, a point not to be forgotten in pot culture. It 
is to the peculiar appearance of the lines of spore heaps with which a 
frond may be striped at the back from top to bottom with a hundred or 
more, that the botanical name of Scolopendrium (from Scolopendra, a 
centipede) is derived. It is the only British Fern with perfectly 
plain, undivided fronds, ani hence cannot be mistaken for any other. 
From the decorative point of view even the common form makes a 
fine handsome ornament when well grown, but although the simple 
strap would seem to afford scanty material for varietal divergence, 
it is a curious fact that hundreds of distinct varieties have been evolved 
from it, many of which indubitably far surpass the normal in beauty. 
So prolific, indeed, has it been in this direction, that a collection of 
Harts-tongues alone would demand a very large space, and be of 
inexhaustable interest to the owner. 
Decidedly the most ornate forms are those belonging to the frilled 
or “ crispum ” section, of which the ordinary type is well known. This 
is the form which the “ plumose ” or extra feathery variation in the 
divided species takes in this, the abnormal development of the leafy 
part of the frond taking the shape perforce of a more or less dense frill, 
this frill in some of the best forms being moreover fringed or finely 
lacerated on its edges. As in plumose forms generally, d.y.. Polypo¬ 
dium cambricum or the Welsh Polypody, no spores are produced, and 
the extra feathery or frilled character appears to arise from their 
suppression, the reproductive vigour being transmitted into leaf-forming 
energy. Considering this barrenness, which in all the true crispums 
is thorough, it is a singular fact that in some parts of the country, 
Monmouthshire especially, a great number of independent finds of 
crispum have been recorded. Col. A. M. Jones of Clifton finding no 
less than twenty-nine isolated plants in one lane. We must thus believe 
that some of the common plants in certain localities yield spores which 
in their turn produce barren, and therefore fiilled plants, since it is 
clear that each find must be au independent sport. Some forms of 
crispum have been found which are partially fertile, but they yield 
fertile progeny, and are, as we have indicated, not considered to be 
“ true,” their plumose character suffering through their fertility to au 
appreciable extent. The best known varieties of crispum are S. v. 
crispum grande. Wills, which in our own collection bears fronds 
6 ^ inches across, i.e., more than double the or unary width. S. v. c. 
fimbriatum, Stansfield, is a gem with a finely fimbriate! edge, of which 
a crested form has been raised by Mr. Cropper. The Fern is, however, 
manifestly taxed to its utmost to produce a deep frill, and hence when 
a crest is formed it is at the expense of the primary or frilled character. 
S. V, c. majus, Moses, S. v. c. Kitonse (a crested form), and S. v. c. capi- 
