74 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ July 20, 1883. 
For six blooms of any Roses Rev. H. Berners was first; and Mr. 
Palmer second with Duke of Edinburgh. 
In the class for twelve Teas and Noisettes Rev. H. A. Berners, who 
has been showing Tea Roses grandly all the season, and has won seven 
first prizes, was first with beautiful blooms of Comtesse de Nadaillac, 
Madame de lVatteville, Souvenir d’Elise, Innocente Pirola, Anna 
Ollivier, Catherine Mermet, Madame Lambard, Marie Van Houtte, 
Marie Guillot, Edith Gifford, Jean Ducher, Souvenir d’un Ami. Second, 
Rev. Page Roberts ; third, Rev. Foster Melliar. In the class for six 
distinct varieties Mr. D. C. Orpen first. 
Fruit, notwithstanding the late season, was good. Lord Rendlesham 
(gardener, Mr. Rogers) was first with a good collection, his Peaches and 
Nectarines being very fine ; he took the first prizes for Peaches and 
Nectarines. 
Vegetables were very fine. The collections shown by Mr. Cresswell, 
gardener to VV. Charteris, Esq., of Stoke Park, and Mr. Andrews, 
gardener to Hon. T. Lowther, were very good. 
The stands of cut flowers shown by lady amateurs were beautifully 
arranged and much admired, the first prize being: taken by Mrs. H. E. 
Archer, and the second and third by Miss Steward, Graham House, and 
Miss M. E. Turner, Clare Lodge. 
NATIONAL ROSE SOCIETY’S SHOW AT DARLINGTON. 
July 20th. 
We have been favoured by the following clipping from the Northern 
Echo descriptive of the provincial Show at Darlington. 
The promoters of the annual provincial Show of the National Rose 
Society at Darlington might well be pardoned if they prematurely 
exulted over the magnificent weather which they believed had favoured 
their venture of Saturday, for up to three o’clock in the afternoon every¬ 
thing was brilliantly fine, although there were those who spoke ominously 
of the hot close character of the atmosphere as boding rain. And these 
latter told an ower-true tale. The English climate once more showed 
up as “fickle as a changeful dream, fantastic as a woman’s mood.” 
It was about the time for excursionists to put in appearance when a 
sharp shower of straight-down rain obtruded its unwelcome presence on 
the scene, although Southend Park—wherein the Show was held by the 
kind courtesy of the Misses Pease—with its noble trees, is well adapted 
for affording shelter in a passing thunderstorm. Hereafter, for the rest 
of the day the sky wore a leaden look, and the air was extremely 
sultry. 
The last occasion upon which the National Rose Society honoured 
Darlington in this way was in July, 1882, when the entries were grati- 
fyingly large. To indicate the extent to which the cultivation of the 
Rose has increased throughout the country we may compare that figure 
with the blooms which were now entered. There were upwards of 
50 per cent, more entries for Saturday’s Show than for that in 1882. 
Unfortunately the season in the north is at least a fortnight late, and 
the consequence was that very many rosarians in the district of Dar¬ 
lington were unable to stage the blooms they had intended, so that the 
actual exhibits fell short of the entries. For example, there was Mr. 
E. R. Whitwell, the noted grower of Barton. He had entered several 
classes, but at the last moment found it impossible to cut Roses of 
tolerable form and colour sufficient to fill a single stand. Taken as a 
whole, the blooms that were shown did not comprise such fine indivi¬ 
dual specimens as in previous years, nor was the quality quite so good 
as has been seen at shows held this year elsewhere. In spite of the 
backward season, however, the collection of specimens, set out most 
effectively in a marquee 60 yards in length, pleased the eye with its 
effect of rich and varied hues. 
It is safe to say that the best stand in the Show was that which won 
the amateurs’ Jubilee trophy, and put up by Mr. T. B. Hall, Rock Ferry, 
Birkenhead, who carried off the c v allenge trophy last year. A feature 
of the Exhibition was the distinct hit made by Messrs. Harkness & Co. 
of Bedale, to whom asain fell the. challenge trophy (valued at £50) in 
the professional division. Their blooms were unexceptionable for clean¬ 
ness and finish, although they had not the substance of those of the 
southern growers, who have had better weather than their northern 
competitors. Naturally the Tea Roses were deficient, their outer leaves 
being generally weather-beaten, except in the case of Messrs. Harkness, 
who had the advantage over southern growers of being able to cut over¬ 
night, and whose blooms were firm and fresh, and proved very success¬ 
ful on the stands. This firm was entitled to every praise for the admirable 
way in which they have sustained the reputation of the north. 
Besides the challenge trophies already referred to, the National 
Society offered three silver medals—one for the best Hybrid Perpetual, 
one for the best Tea or Noisette in the amateur class, and one for 
(he best box of Roses shown in the district classes. The first-named 
medal was given to Mr. E. B. Lindsell for Her Majesty, a bright 
satiny Rose, with flowers exceptionally large, very full, and the petals 
most symmetrically arranged. The medal for the best Tea Rose fell to 
the Rev. F. R. Burnside, Gloucestershire, for Marie Van Houtte, a large 
and full bloom, charming in its combination of yellow and peach. Mr. 
A. IVhitton, Bedale, took the third medal for the best box shown by 
district growers. The gold medal of the National Society was offered 
for three trusses of any new seedling Rose not yet in commerce ; but 
there were no entries in the class. 
The duties of judging were performed by the nurserymen for the 
amateur classes, and by the amateur exhibitors for the professional 
divisions. The Rev. H. Honywood D’Ombrain was in attendance, and 
expressed himself thoroughly satisfied with the general arrangement, 
for the excellence of which warm praise is due to Mr. E. R. Whitwell 
and Mr. G. S. Byers, the local Secretaries. 
Appended are the names of the Judges, together with their 
awards :— 
Nurserymen’s Divisions.—Rev. J. H. Pemberton. Mr. E. R. Whitwell, 
Mr. T. B. Hall, Lieut.-Col. Standish Hore, Mr. W. E. Boyes, Mr. James 
E. Backhouse, Rev. Page-Roberts, Mr. W. E. Hall, Rev. H. H. D’Ombrain 
(Secretary), and Rev. Foster-Melliar. Amateur Sections.—Messrs. J. 
Burrell, W. Burch, H. W. Williams, G. Paul, G. Prince, W. F. Cooling, 
J. Jefferies, Harkness, jun. 
Nurserymen (open). — Thirty-six dissimilar, single trusses. First 
and challenge trophy, Messrs. Harkness & Son, Bedale. Second, 
Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt. Third, Mr. B. R. Cant, Colchester. 
Fourth, Messrs. Keynes, Williams & Co., Salisbury. Seventy-two dis¬ 
similar, single trusses, Messrs. Paul & Son, Cheshunt, Second Mr. P. 
II. Cant. Third, Messrs. Cranston & Co., Hereford. Thirty-six dissimi¬ 
lar, three trusses of each, Messrs. Paul & Son. Second, Mr. B. R. Cant. 
Third, Cranston & Co. Thirty-six disssmilar, single trusses, Messrs. J. 
Jefferies & Son, Cirencester. Second, Mr. W. H. Frettingham, Beeston, 
Notts. Third, G. & W. H. Burch, Peterborough. Fourth, J. Burrell and 
Co., Cambridge. Eighteen dissimilar, three trusses of each. Messrs. J. 
Jefferies & Son. Second, Messrs. G. Cooling & Sons, Bath. Third, 
Messrs. Burch. Fourth, Messrs. Keynes, Williams & Co. 
Amateur Division.—Twenty-four dissimilar, single trusses, first and 
challenge trophy, Mr. T. B. Hall, Rock Ferry, Birkenhead ; second, Rev. 
J. H. Pemberton, Romford, Essex; third, Mr. S. P. Budd, Bath ; fourth, 
Mr. A. Slaughter, Steyning, Sussex. Thirty-six dissimilar, single trusses, 
Rev. J. H. Pemberton ; second, Mr. T. B. Hall. Twelve dissimilar, three 
trusses each, Rev. J. H. Pemberton ; second, Mr. T. B. Hall ; third, Mr. 
S. P. Budd. Twenty-four dissimilar, single trusses, Mr. B. B. Lindsell, 
Hitchin ; second, Rev. A. Foster-Melliar, Ipswich ; third, Mr. E. Mawley, 
Berkhampstead, Herts ; fourth, Mr. A. Slaughter. Twelve dissimilar, 
ditto, Lieut.-Col. F. Standish Hore, St. Asaph ; second, Mr. W. Hutchin¬ 
son, Kirbymoorsidc ; third, Mr. W. E. Hall, Birkenhead ; fourth, Rev. 
F. Page-Roberts, Scole, Norfolk. Six dissimilar, ditto, Miss Alice M. 
Lucas, Hitchin ; second, Mr. II. Y. Edwards, Mach worth, Derby. 
Division E (open to residents within thirty miles of Darlington, who 
have never won a first prize at any exhibition of the National Rose 
Society held elsewhere than at Darlington), twelve dissimilar, single 
trusses, Mr. A. Whitton, Bedale ; second, Mrs. Maynard Proud, East 
Layton Hall, Darlington ; third, Mr. D. Green, Scorton. Six dissimilar, 
ditto, Mr. W. E. Brown, 22, Milton Street, Darlington. Extra Class— 
Six new Roses, distinct, single trusses, Rev. A. Foster-Melliar. 
Tea and Noisette division (open).—Twelve Teas or Noisettes, three 
trusses of each, Messrs. Harkness A Son ; second, Mr. G. Prince, Oxford ; 
third, Rev. F. R. Burnside, Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire ; fourth, 
Mr. B. R. Cant. Nurserymen, eighteen ditto, single, Mr. G. Prince ; 
second, Mr. B. R. Cant. Two ditto, ditto, Messrs. Harkness & Son; 
equal seconds, Messrs. J. Jefferies & Son and Messrs. Keynes, Williams 
and Co. ; Fourth, Messrs. Paul & Son. Amateurs, twelve single trusses, 
Rev. F. R. Burnside ; second, Mr. E. B. Lindsell; third, Rev. F. Page- 
Roberts ; fourth, Mr. A. Slaughter. Six ditto, Rev. A. Foster-Melliar ; 
second, Mr. E. Mawley ; third, Colonel Standish Hore ; fourth, Mrs. 
Times, Hitchin. 
Open Division.—Twelve new Roses, dissimilar, single trusses, Paul 
and Son. Twelve single trusses of any yellow Rose, Mr. G. Prince. 
Second, Mr. B. R. Cant. Third, Messrs. R. Mack & Son, Catterick. 
Twelve white Roses, Messrs. Burch. Second, Mr. S. P. Budd. Third, 
Mr. G. Prince. Extra prize, Rev. F. P. Roberts. Twelve single crimson 
ditto, Messrs. Cranston &; Co. Second, Mr. S. P. Budd. Third, Mr. 
W. H. Frettingham. Twelve dark crimson ditto, Messrs. Cranston and 
Co. Second, Messrs, G. Cooling & Sons. Third, Mr. B. R. Cant. Twelve 
blooms, six of each, Harkness & Son. Second, Mr. B. R. Cant. Equal 
third, Mr. G. Prince and Messrs. Burch. 
STRAWBERRIES FOR FORCING. 
I am pleased to see that Mr. Bardney thinks much more highly of 
saving late autumn runners for forcing than he was at first disposed to 
do. Allow me to thank him for again drawing attention to it, and we 
shall expect to hear of the success of his proposed experiment. His soil 
being light, I have no doubt he will succeed much better than I should 
do were I to adopt the same plan. The soil here is just opposite, and if 
I were to do as he proposed, by the middle of June I should have very 
gross plants, each lifting with more soil than could be crammed into 
a 6-inch pot. This year 1 left my plants in the nursery rows till June, 
and placed them direct into their largest pots, and I regret to say my 
plants are not so good as usual. The check they received in potting 
has thrown them back considerably. I think in most soils it would be 
quite unnecessary to pot before planting out in the autumn. On the 
other hand, on strong soils I think it is important that the plants be 
placed in 60’s early in spring to prevent a gross growth, and have the 
plants so that they can be placed in their fruiting pots without a check 
any time when convenient during June. 
Allow me here to disclaim all credit of having originated this excellent 
plan of treating plants for forcing. It is one of the many l! wrinkles ” 
I have gleaned from these pages during the last twenty-five years I have 
been a reader of them. I have practised it for eight or nine years. 
Perhaps some one who has a pile of back volumes can trace it to its 
source, and let honour be given to whom it is due.—R. Inglis. 
