43 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ January 21> 1883 
Japanese variety of a bright rose colour, whitish in the centre. They are 
all distinct and attractive varieties. 
NOTES ON SOME GRAPES. 
In 1874 a house of Muscat of Alexandria Vines was planted 
here. The border was made of what was considered first-rate loam, 
rather inclined to clay than to sand. The drainage of the site was 
as perfect as it could be made, and the average depth of the 
soil was 2J- feet. There was no manure of any description put in 
it except ground bones and horn shavings. The progress of the 
Vines for several years was mo3t satisfactory—in fact, they made 
splendid Vines in a very short time, and for several years brought 
very fair Grapes to a certain stage, but never finished them to my 
satisfaction. Always in autumn the foliage became spotted and 
scorched, decayed prematurely, and of course the Grapes shrivelled. 
In the same range and in exactly the same soil other varieties 
of Grapes, such as Black Hamburgh, Gros Colman, &c., were 
planted contemporaneously with the Muscats, and without an 
exception they all did remarkably well and continue still to do so. 
Various remedial measures were adopted in the case of the Muscats ; 
but not proving quite satisfactory, in the autumn of 1883 a trench 
was taken out right across the border at a distance of 9 feet from 
the boles of the Vines, crashing through every root, where these 
were numerous and in perfect health. Then the soil was carefully 
removed up to the boles of the Vines, preserving as many roots as 
possible. The border was made shallower by 10 inches by adding 
broken bricks and rough gravel to the surface of the site. The 
strong roots were cut back severely, and laid in soil consisting of 
exactly the same sort of loam as they formerly grew in, but with a 
considerably greater amount of lime rublish, charcoal, &c., than 
was put into the original border, for the conclusion was arrived at 
that the evil arose from the border being too deep and not open 
enough for the great rainfall of this district—sometimes nearly 
6 feet in a year. 
In 1884 the growth was not very strong, but the foliage was 
maintained to the last and ripened perfectly. The Grapes ripened 
much better, and did not shrivel. In 1885 the Vines made stronger 
growths than ever before, carried their foliage till it ripened to the 
amber colour of a Maple, and the crop of fruit was of course in 
proportion as to quality. This experience may be of use to some 
of your numerous readers similarly situated. 
Black Hamburgh and Gros Colman, as well as other varieties, 
including the Duke, seem to revel in the strong well-drained loam 
2J feet deep. I find Gros Maroc a very inferior Grape in every 
point except colour to Gros Colman when grown in Muscat heat. 
The former I have not in a cool house, and the little there i3 of it 
is a graft on a Muscat stock. I consider it a watery flavourless 
variety. Some consider Cooper’s Late Black to be identical with 
Gros Maroc. I should doubt that verdict very much, but shall 
be in a better position to offer an opinion on the point next season. 
It will perhaps be remembered by some of your older readers 
that in 1860-61 I fought a pen-and-ink battle with several writers, 
among others the late Mr. Cramb of Tortworth, in relation to the 
Bowood Muscat, I maintaining that it was quite distinct from the 
common forms of Alexandrian Muscat, and the other writers deny¬ 
ing this. My opinion was never shaken by anything that has been 
advanced to the contrary, and I was not a little interested to find 
an experienced Grape-grower pointing out the difference between 
the Bowood and Muscat of Alexandria in the calendar in a contem¬ 
porary recently, and in almost the same words—at least, to exactly 
the same effect—as I used a quarter of a century since. Mr. Cole¬ 
man states that he had his Bowood direct from Bowood, and so I 
received the Vine I wrote of in 1860. Mr. Coleman points out 
now, just as I did then, that it is earlier and that it has broader 
bunches and rounder berries. You, Mr. Editor, make Bowood and 
Muscat of Alexandria identical. In a sense you are correct, but 
they are perfectly distinct varieties—more distinct than any two 
varieties of Black Hamburgh I know. I note, however, that in 
your select list you give Bowood and Muscat of Alexandria. 
Since I came here I have bought what was called Bowood Muscat, 
but have never had it true. As it is so good a setter and earlier 
than Muscat of Alexandria I should like and hope now to have it 
again. —David Thomson, Drumlanng. 
[The Bowood Muscat Grape is one of those pomological puzzles 
that crop up from time to time, and which give rise to much dis¬ 
cussion before they are effectually solved. The distinctness of this 
variety and its identity with White Muscat of Alexandria have 
already been subjects of heated discussion. The late Mr. Cramb of 
Tortworth lost his temper and nearly lost his head over it ; and 
after the question was thought to have been settled it turns up 
again after a lull of nearly a quarter of century upon the authority 
of two noted cultivators whose opinions always claim a patient 
hearing. We saw one of the first bunches the Bowood Vine pro¬ 
duced, and on reference to our note at the time we described the 
berries as oval inclining to Pear shape. In the plate issued in the 
volume of Tim Florist for 1857, which was then edited by Mr. 
Spencer, who raised the Bowood Muscat, the berries are there re¬ 
presented as long oval, the description in the text being “ oval and 
sometimes Pear-shaped.” Mr. ft. Thompson describes them as 
“ very large, oval, inclined to obovate.” Mr. Coleman, it seems, 
now says they are rounder than Muscat of Alexandria. The most 
characteristic feature is that which both Mr. Thomson and Mr. 
Coleman rely upon, and that is its earliness. We shall be glad to 
hear the opinion of some other of our experienced readers on this 
subject.] 
NOTES ON CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 
Messes. Oechaed and Molyneux are both of opinion that Japanese 
Anemone-flowered are not admissible in a stand of the orthodox Japanese 
sorts, and it also appears that our “regular judges,” whoever they may 
be, would disqualify an exhibitor who infringed this unwritten law. The 
question is, How did these Japanese Anemones originate ? If they owe, 
as I believe they do, as much of their parentage to the Japanese as to 
the Anemones, or, to be plain, are a distinct natural cross between the 
two, surely they have as much right to be admitted in one class as in the 
other. They are simply relegated to the Anemone section principally 
because they are most wanted or there is more room for them there, 
Japanese varieties being really too plentiful. For somewhat similar 
reasons several of the reflexed Japanese varieties may well be admitted 
into the reflexed section, as here there is also a paucity of colour. The 
time is not far distant when we shall have a grand mixture, one section 
running into the other, and the Chinese, which include the incurved and 
old Anemone sections, are evidently largely contributing to the creation 
of new so-called Japanese and other sorts. As instances of this I have 
only to point to the Japanese Anemone-flowered and the semi-globose Mrs. 
Todman, while Comte de Germiny and, in a lesser degree, Japonais 
evidently have Chinese blood in their veins. 
As Mr. Orchard rightly remarks, the line must be drawn somewhere, 
but I maintain that this unpleasant duty should not be left to the judges, 
but it should be done authoritatively. There ought to be no difficulty 
about it any more than there is in the case of the Rose. Numerous 
practical growers doubtless will disagree with my views, but, as I pre¬ 
viously mentioned, a well-informed authority expressed the opinion that 
we acted rightly in the matter. 
Mr. Molyneux infers that I have formed a very poor opinion of the 
merits of Lord Alcestor, and hints that the plants were not well grown, 
but he is wrong in both surmises. The plants that produced the mal¬ 
formed blooms were extra strong, standing fully 5 feet high, and the 
buds were very promising, yet proved extremely disappointing. The 
blooms were very large, but if Mr. Molyneux or anyone else could have 
dressed them into good form, all I can say is that they are very clever 
dressers indeed. We had plenty to practise on, both on and off the 
plants, but failed completely with them. It is a fine variety all the 
same. With regard to the sport from Mrs. Forsyth, I can only say that 
it much resembles its parent, and I do not think such an experienced 
and well-known grower and exhibitor as Mr. Bradner would make any 
mistake in the matter ; at any rate, I should not, with my comparatively 
short experience in Chrysanthemum culture, venture to question his 
ability to “rightly name ” the parent of the sport. Mr. Molyneux shall 
have an opportunity of judging for himself as to the merits of the incurved 
Chrysanthemum John Bradner.—W. IgguldEN. 
REVIEW OF BOOK. 
The Golden Gate and Silver Steps, by Shieley Hibbeed. London: 
H. W. Allen, 4, Ave Maria Lane. 
Whatevee emanates from the pen of Mr. Shirley Hibberd is either 
instructive or amusing. In the volume before us he has gathered together 
a number of what used to be called “ fugitive pieces ” which have 
appealed from time to time in various publications, and they may all be 
classed in one or other of these categories. The amusing certainly pre¬ 
dominates ; but there are also among them themes that stir the heart and 
stimulate the finer feelings of our nature, notably the poem “Water- 
creeses.” It reminds us of Thomas Hood. 
A citation from the chapter of “ The Philosopher’s Garden” shows 
that quiet humour is not incompatible with sensible hints. 
At an early age my father took me to see the philosopher’s garden. I am 
sure he was attracted by the feeling that prompts many people to take their 
children to see pantomimes. They take them because they want to see the 
pantomimes themselves. It was so in this case, I am sure, though I must 
say on behalf of Dad that he made as many opportunities as he could for 
me ! and blessed be his memory for all he did 1 The philosopher had 
invited him to see the garden, and he pretended (bless his pardonable 
vanity !) that he went for my sake, when I knew at the t ; me he was on a 
sharp look out for his own individual gratification. However, we did go ; 
and that constitutes the first chapter of this dull story. I remember we 
were most cordially received by the members of the philosopher’s family; 
and I remember, too, I trembled with fear of meeting the philosopher, fori 
expected he would stand on a pedestal high above our heads, clad in scarlet 
robes dotted with cabalistic figures, with a wand in his hand and a crown on 
his head, and a most awful voice like thunder in the cellar, as I had seen 
(and heard) the representation of a sorcerer in a waxworks exhibition that 
