266 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
April 6, 1894. 
The National Chrysanthemum Society’s Beport and Schedule. 
Apart from the satisfactory financial statement of this publication, 
and the general tone of life and prosperity reflected, also apart from the 
schedule of prizes, the present issue is particularly interesting as con¬ 
taining valuable papers by Mr. C. E. Pearson and Sir. C. E. Shea, with 
the instructive discussions thereupon, Mr. Pearson sought, very com- 
mendably and ably, to “ Improve Chrysanthemum Showsand Mr. 
Shea endeavoured not less commendably and ably to evolve some 
definite “ Canons of Judging.” Great subjects, both of them, and, as 
the discussion showed, such as cannot be settled in one meeting. 
Arranging Chrysanthemums. 
Mr. Pearson first referred to cut blooms, and while admitting the 
convenience of the present system for comparing their merits, condemned 
the “dabs of colour in long lines as most repulsive to anyone with the 
least artistic taste.” Evidently our friend felt the “strength” of the 
custom as indicated by the strength of his language. He would like to 
have the blooms shown with visible leafy stems. Classes for such 
exhibits have been tried at some shows, but the competition did not lead 
to an extension of them—at least, of incurved blooms ; nor did visitors 
crowd around them after being repulsed by the long lines of splendid 
specimens of culture staged in the orthodox way. 
Formality is of the very essence of highly developed incurved Chrys¬ 
anthemums, and although Mr. Pearson objects to their precision in 
arrangement, as reminding of “ bricks in a wall,” or “ soldiers on 
parade,” does he think the wall would look better if the bricks were 
arranged in picturesque irregularity, or a regimental review be more 
imposing if the men moved about in delightful disorder? Is there not 
beauty in appropriateness to the purpose in view—a type of beauty, 
though it may be in conflict with the ideal of persons who have such 
an abhorrence of straight lines that it is a wonder they do not have their 
vest buttons in gracefully curved rows, or dotted here and there in 
“refined artistic taste?” As Mr. Wynne said truly, the real Chrys¬ 
anthemum lover looks for “ quality in blooms above all things,” and 
they must be so displayed that their points can be appreciated, not by 
judges alone, but by visitors who appear to flock in ever increasing 
numbers to discriminate and admire. 
When we pass from the incurved to the Japanese these undoubtedly 
lend themselves to greater freedom in arrangement, and though the 
present system is not likely to be discontinued, a great addition, or as 
great as space allows, might be made to the beauty of exhibitions by 
having classes in which handsome blooms on leafy stems might be 
pleasingly disposed for decorative eflEect, according to methods that have 
been tried or which might be devised by persons not having the 
“least” but the “most artistic sense.” 
Grouping Chrysanthemums. 
Mr. Pearson was on firmer ground when he assailed “groups for 
effect.” Some of them can only come within the conditions by the 
interposition of a qualifying term—“ arranged for (bad) efifect.” The 
National Chrysanthemum Society has erred grievously in the example set 
by prize groups at its shows. They have been a burlesque on big, flat, 
packed, insipid, and wholly tasteless bouquets. Some of the worst 
“ groups for effect ” in the kingdom have been “ arranged ” in the 
Westminster Aquarium. Not all the worst be it understood, because in 
numbers of shows dirty pots and naked stems have stood out obtrusively. 
Yet, where there are large blooms, hoisted from 4 to 8 feet above 
the pots, such groups “for effect ” must have first prizes, because, for¬ 
sooth, of “ quality of blooms.” Mr. Pearson’s epithet, “ hideous abomi¬ 
nations,” is hardly too strong in this reference. 
Superiority, or “ quality ” of blooms, is not in the least incompatible 
with other essential requisites—taste in arrangement, a plenitude of 
healthy foliage, and the absence of anything unpleasing, whether of 
unclean pots, staring sticks, or offensive wires supplanting Nature’s 
grace by a harsh, clumsy artificiality. A fringe of small plants for 
hiding the large pots, and a few plants interspersed as a foil to splendidly 
grown Chrysanthemums may, in good hands, produce an effect that 
Chrysanthemums alone cannot equal. One or two of such groups at the 
Hull shows have far exceeded in beauty any that have been arranged in 
London or even at the Crystal Palace. Yet now and then, at different 
shows, groups of Chrysanthemums solely have displayed both high 
culture and tasteful arrangement in a most satisfactory way. As Mr. 
Stevens suggests, let us have both kinds of groups where there is room 
for them, and money enough for prizes to bring out the best, for there 
is assuredly room for improvement. 
Mr. Pearson’s trenchant remarks will be productive of great good, 
and he had reason to be satisfied with the excellent discussion that 
followed on the reading of his suggestive paper. We will refer to Mr. 
Shea’s analytical contribution on judging blooms on a future occasion ; 
in the meantime all Chrysanthemum growers and judges should read 
his paper, also Mr. Pearson’s, in the N.C.S. report and schedule just 
issued.—W. 
Mrs. Alpheus Hardy. 
Two seasons ago I put some half-dozen plants of this variety to the 
wall, where, proverbially, weak ones must go, with better results than 
I have obtained from them in any other position. In an open space 
between two Pear trees the pots were stood on a board and the stems 
secured by shreds and nails ; they also had more than an ordinary share 
of the syringe. 
Apropos of purity of colour, which Mr. Kainbow speaks of on 
page 224, I think it deserves all he says for it, and more also ; there is 
a lustrous whiteness about it absent in any other white, however pure. 
Delightfully uncertain as is this charming variety, a good flower on an 
exhibition board speaks volumes for the grower. Of the so-called 
ostrich plume varieties, it appears to be the one most worthy of the 
name. How misleading are some catalogue descriptions—viz., “ the 
pink Mrs. Hardy,” and “ the yellow Mrs. Hardy.” Doubtless true 
sports with clear, bright colours would be as beautiful as the original ; 
yet owing to the “ miffy ” character one should, perhaps, rest content 
with the unique original.—E. K. 
FERTILISING CUCUMBER BLOOMS. 
As this is the time of the year when many persons will be engaged 
in the cultivation of Cucumbers perhaps a few remarks on the fertilisa¬ 
tion of the flowers may not be out of place in the Journal of Horti¬ 
culture, This is a practice in which there is a diversity of opinion, 
some growers thinking it necessary to fertilise the blooms for the 
production of good fruit, while others have opinions the reverse of this. 
Early last summer I was shown some very good Cucumbers, the 
grower remarking that he always made it a practice to fertilise the 
flowers, and attributed his success to this fact, though as far as my 
experience teaches me he was wrong, and the small deformed fruit we 
sometimes see are not caused by imperfect or non-fertilisation, as some 
seem to think, but by other reasons perhaps rather difficult to account 
for. Sometimes in training the plants or in watering the small fruit 
may get bruised while young and tender, and so prevent it swelling 
properly. A low and too moist temperature with too much water at the 
roots is also, I believe, another cause of deformed fruit. 
We fertilise flowers to induce them to produce fertile seed, but to 
produce good Cucumbers for the table they should contain no seed, and 
owners who do fertilise their Cucumber blooms will find that not one 
in fifty will contain any seed at all ; so the question naturally arises. 
Does fertilisation have any other effect upon the fruit than producing 
fertile seed ? 
In the case of many fruits fertilisation is advantageous, resulting in 
finer specimens ; especially is this noticeable with stone fruit, such as 
the Peach or Nectarine—in fact, these will not swell if not properly 
fertilised, and in this case, as well as fertile seed being produced, the 
fleshy or edible part of the fruit is improved. This can easily be seen 
by examining deformed fruit that swell on one side only. On dissection 
the seeds will nearly always be defective on the imperfect side, but 
good on the other. 
With the Cucumber it is very different. It should be all flesh, with 
no seeds, as everyone knows who is fond of eating them, and the quality 
of the fruit does not depend upon fertilisation, but upon the soil they 
are grown in and the atmospheric conditions they are subjected to, so 
I maintain that so far as the Cucumber is concerned, fertilising the 
blooms is an erroneous practice and a waste of time. I used to resort to 
the practice until experience told me it was wrong. All staminate blooms 
should be removed as soon as they appear, so that all the energies of the 
plant may be directed to the formation of fruit. This is more necessary 
on plants that are forced early, during the dull cold days of winter and 
early spring. Perhaps other readers of the Journal will give their 
opinions.—J. S. Upex, Wigganthorpe, Yorh. 
WATERING IN THE SPRING. 
Drought in the spring has many advantages, more especially when 
it follows on a season of much rain; but its disadvantages will be upper¬ 
most in the mind of those who are still engaged in carrying out ground 
alterations or in planting. I believe the success of newly planted trees 
and shrubs is not unfrequently marred by a term of dry weather at this 
time of the year. If the planting has been finished in the autumn the 
danger is not so great; but if, as generally happens, it has been continued 
during the winter and spring the chance is that the trees or shrubs may 
be seriously damaged tefore steps are taken to protect them from the 
effects of dryness. 
I know that the application of water to newly planted shrubs and 
trees is looked upon as an evil, but in dry soils it is impossible to get 
them to thrive without the aid of water. What I wish to emphasise 
now is this. Instead of waiting until the roots and the soil become dry 
it is better in all ways to water before that acute stage has been reached. 
For one thing less water will be needed, and, indeed, it is just as well at 
this early season to give no more than is necessary. Above all, however, 
it will secure the plants against suffering from dryness and enable the 
rooting process to proceed unchecked, and as a consequence save water¬ 
ing in the future, when it is perhaps less wanted. 
In the case of good-sized fruit trees transplanted in the autumn, and 
now rapidly approaching the blossoming stage, the benefit of water 
applied at this time is great. These trees, if they have been properly 
