February 22, 1894. 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER, 
151 
diversity of constitutional range of susceptibility to blooming influences 
of the plant in the other scale, and bear in mind that although it has 
a definite system of blooming—or it may be attempting to bloom—it 
is somewhat at variance with the systems obtaining in other plants 
which flower during greater length of day and sunshine ; whilst the 
Chrysanthemum has to contend, as it were, against the waning or dying 
influences to flowering which other plants escape, and again add to 
these complicating effects on the plant that the unnatural and forcing 
system of cultivation intensifies the whole game of cross purposes. It 
will be evident, then, that whatever system of cultivation is adopted 
we are brought face to face with circumstances over which we have 
no direct control, and we may compare the case to the captain of a ship 
trying to make his port against adverse winds. Yet he knows that 
if he cannot get into port on one tack he will do so on another. So 
it is with the Chrysanthemum grower, who, knowing what port to 
steer for, will use his best judgment in grappling with the obstacles 
which beset him. Very often a ship will have to shape her course, and 
take her bearings by some prominent landmark before she can come 
safe into port. The Chrysanthemum grower is under similar conditions, 
and the landmark which he must steer for is to time his buds of the 
different varieties so that each of them may have, as far as possible, 
such a season as is suitable for their full development. 
But what is also of quite as much importance at this critical point is 
that the plants should also be in a suitable condition as to ripeness, 
neither too grossly vigorous nor too ripe on the other hand. In the 
first case the cultivator will be called upon to note closely the con¬ 
dition of the gross and slow developing varieties, and bring them into 
subjection. They should be propagated or stopped so that a suflBcient 
length of time is given them to make an instalment of growth from 
the stopping stage to the bud-showing stage, to show the bud at 
such a time as may be suitable for its full development. The gross 
habit should be modified by restricting their root room and judicious 
holding back of stimulating manures in the early part of the season. 
In our neighbourhood (Wakefield) the difficulty is to get this class of 
Chrysanthemum ripe enough. In reference to those sorts which are 
liable to become too ripe, later propagation and avoiding anything in 
the way of a check to the energies of the plant, not only during the 
early stages of growth, but the root action should be vigorously 
maintained quite up to the full developTnent of the flower, good 
top-dressings being very advantageous to this end. 
It will be evident from the foregoing remarks that whatever system 
may be adopted we shall have these complications of season and con¬ 
stitutional variation to contend with, so that it is quite within reason 
to say that what turned out to be a success with the late rooted plants 
last year might not occur the coming season, because the conditions may 
be changed so far as to greatly modify the results. But yet as we are 
all seeking truth rather than the vain idea of upsetting the practical 
conclusions of so eminent an authority as Mr. Tunnington let us look 
at the question from the other standpoint. We are bound to acknow¬ 
ledge that grand blooms have been produced on the system Mr. Tun¬ 
nington advocates, and it would be the height of folly to miss any 
chance of improving the exhibitor’s position on the show-boards, or 
neglect any opportunity of improving the cultivation of the flower. It 
will be evident, however, in the face of the complications which I have 
attempted to define, that in formulating a line of practice based upon 
the later propagation of the plant we should be bound to meet them 
systematically, so that the buds are well timed, as is done on the present 
system. 
Any method of culture endorsed by Mr, Tunnington is bound to 
carry with it great weight, and what I ha4 e written may be considered 
more in the light of drawing him out on the question rather than to be 
taken as directly antagonistic to it. The strength of his position lays in 
the fact that root action and growth are more vigorous, and the latter 
made under better conditions than those plants which have been 
dragging on through the dark winter days. Yet without Mr. Tunnington 
further shows his hand by giving more details, which are desirable, we 
shall have to rest content by adopting his suggestion as a supplement to 
the present system.— Thos. Garnett, 
Old and New Chrysanthemums. 
Mr. Lees (page 133) has anticipated me. Having the photograph 
of the stand of forty-eight blooms distinct varieties that finally won for 
the late Mr. Harding, gardener to F. D. Galpin, Esq., Putney, the first 
Kingston challenge cup in 1882 before me every day, I thought the 
publication of the names of the varieties at this particular time would 
be very interesting. Mr. Lees has given the names of the Japanese 
varieties that Mr. Molyneux exhibited, and which won the second 
Kingston cup in the following year, 1883. These are varieties now a 
long way in the rear, but on reference to Mr. Harding’s stand it will be 
seen that it did not even include that ideal Japanese Boule d’Or which 
was introduced and very well shown by Mr. Molyneux in his first com¬ 
petition for the cup in 1882. 
Mr. Harding’s stand consisted of :—Incurved—Queen of England* 
Golden Empress, Princess Teck, Le Grand, Hero of Stoke Newington, 
Mrs. Halliburton, Pink Perfection, Novelty, John Salter, Princess of 
Wales, Nil Desperandum, Lady Hardinge, Jardin des Plantes, Prince 
Alfred, Venus, Alfred Salter, Mrs. Heales, Golden Queen of England, 
Princess Beatrice, Mr. Brunlees, Mr. Bunn, Empress of India, Empress 
Eugenie, and White Venus. Japanese—Elaine, La Nymphe, Bouquet 
Fait, L’Incomparable, Fulgore, Triomphe de Cbatelet, M. Ardene, 
Criterion, Marguerite Marroucb. Mdlle. Monlise, Garnet, Plantagenet, 
Thunberg, Curiosity (?), M. Plancheau, Baronne de Prailly, Fair Maid of 
Guernsey, Comte de Germiny, Madame Burnet, Comtesse de Beaure- 
garde, Dr. Masters, Madame C. Audiguier, Fanny Boucharlet, and 
Bronze Dragon. 
About half of the incurved varieties are still indispensable for exhi¬ 
bition, but the Japanese shows a wonderful evolution in eleven years. The 
six blooms of Madame C. Audiguier shown by Mr. Molyneux at that time 
at Kingston astonished us. Who, indeed, would have thought then that 
it would have been superseded and out of date in such a short space of 
time ? One can imagine what a sensation a stand of Ed. Molyneux, 
Viviand Morel, or Col. W. B, Smith, such as was exhibited at some of 
the leading shows last year, would have caused.—C. Orchard, Beiyi~ 
bridge, I. W. 
In no flower has such a remarkable change come over the selections 
of varieties in half a dozen years as in the case of the Chrysanthemum. 
Although all sections are affected by the introduction of new varieties 
annually, it is amongst the Japanese particularly that the substitution 
of names has taken place so largely. There are three reasons to be 
noticed for this extraordinary change of variety. First, the newer sorts 
are so much superior to older ones; secondly, they can be so easily 
raised from seed; and lastly, there is such a demand for novelty 
nowadays, that persons so much interested in new sorts, whether from 
financial aims or a love for the flower, procure them immediately. 
Taking the Japanese section first, of the leading forty-eight varieties 
six years ago not more than three or four can now be found on the 
exhibition table. This is a distinct proof of the rapidity of the increase 
and appreciation of the newer raised varieties. Boule d’Or, Mdlle. 
Lacroix, and Val d’Andorre are the three that are at all to be seen. The 
former has perhaps stood its ground longer than any other sort in 
existence. As a rule where one variety has gone out of cultivation, as it 
were, certainly from the show tables, others have come to take their 
place. Not so, however, in the case of Boule d’Or. This is now 
declining as an exhibition variety, but not because it has been ousted 
by the superiority of a rival. At the present time we have not one of 
the same character to fill the gap which must necessarily occur when 
this somewhat peculiar formed flower has been seen for the last time in 
the exhibition building. True, there are plenty of yellows, but not one 
with the formation of floret that this has. The constitution of this 
Japanese variety introduced by Bernard nearly twelve years since is 
gradually becoming weaker. Why, it would be difficult to say, but the 
fact remains the same. 
Take another example — Madame C. Audiguier, introduced by 
Marroucb in 1879. This once highly prized variety is hardly ever met 
with now-a-days. It was not because the public were tired of seeing the 
silky, mauve florets arranged like loose basketwork, or that cultivators 
grew tired of a plant that grew so tall. It was purely a question of 
constitution. No variety was easier to produce good blooms from than 
this. I am aware though that its extreme height was not favourable to 
retention, but I know that an exhibitor will contend against much that 
is inconvenient if good blooms can be assured of deserving and popular 
varieties. 
Comparing the varieties of the present day with those of the time 
stated we are very much to the good in the matter of form and colour, 
the principal points to observe. In the place of Madame C. Audiguier 
we now have Waban, Mrs. C. H. Payne, Etoilede Lyon, and Viscountess 
Hambledon, all somewhat similar in colour. Belle Paule is superseded 
by Madame Octavie Mirbeau, Fair Maid of Guernsey, Meg Merrilies, 
Mdlle. Lacroix, Elaine, and Mons. Astorg by Mdlle. Th^r^se Rey, Florence 
Davis, Avalanche, and Stanstead White. In dark colours, where we 
were wont to recognise J. Delaux, M.arguerite Marroucb, L’Africaine, 
M. Delaux, and P§re Delaux, we have Edwin Mol.yneux, Wm. Seward, 
J. Shrimpton, and Elmer d’Smith. Incurved blooms like Comte 
de Germiny—a long time a favourite—we now have Mrs. C. Wheeler, 
Beauty of Castlewood, Lord Brooke, Mrs. E. W. Clarke, Louise, and 
Thomas Hewitt, a most decided gain. 
When we come to yellows to replace Boule d’Or, Golden Dragon, 
Thunberg, Peter the Great, and Grandiflorum we depend upon Sun¬ 
flower, Golden Wedding, W. H. Lincoln, C. Blick, Mrs. F. A. Spaulding, 
and Le Prince du Bois—a decided gain. To replace the lilac, rose, and 
mauve flowers represented by Baronne de Prailly, Fernand F^ral, 
Madame de Sdvin, Bouquet Fait, Dr. Macary, Balmoreau. and Mons. Tarin 
we can easily and with confidence depend upon Viviand Morel, G. C. 
Schwabe, W. Tricker, Excelsior, President Borel, Eda Prass. Violet Rose, 
Miss D. Shea, Alberic Lunden, Le Verseau, and Madame E. Rey. In 
bronzes, to replace Criterion, Val d’Andorre, Duchess of Albany, 
L’Adorable, Tiiomphe de la Rue des Chalets, Japooaise, Madame B. 
Rendatler, and Flamme de Punch mention may be made of Charles 
Davis, Colonel W. B. Smith, Lord Brooke, Mrs. F. Jamejon, Gloire du 
Rocher, and W. W. Coles. 
Varieties pale pink or b’ush in co’our are worthilv represented by 
Mdlle. Marie Hoste, Puritan, Miss Anna Hartshorn, Mrs. E. D. Adams, 
Vice-President Audiguier, Mrs. Beckett, Inteinati ml. Rose Wynne, 
Mrs. E. Whittle, and Lilian B. Bird in the place of La Nymphe, Mrs. 
Mahood, Hiver Fleuri, M. Burnet, Fanny Bouchaiiat, Sarnia, and 
Madame Deveille. Many more varieties might be named, but enough 
has been said to show the great progress that has been made in so short 
a period as seven years.—E. Molyneux, 
