208 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ March 18, 1886. 
of which ha transmitted to his friend Van der Diplt in Belgium, 
whence they spread over Germany and were known in Strasburg in 
1595, and by the middle of the following century had come into 
general cultivation throughout continental Europe and England. 
Of these two Auriculas, however, the P. Auricula being a true 
species showed but little tendency to variation, was comparatively 
neglected, and in time died almost entirely out of cultivation ; 
while P. pubescens, which is a natural hybrid, gave birth to a great 
series of varieties, the English, or farinose, and the Dutch strains 
being especially distinct, and by the close of the seventeenth cen¬ 
tury had become one of the most valued of all cultivated plants. 
The name Auricula did not originate with Clusius, but is used by 
Matthioli in 1555, and even by earlier writers. Clusius gathered 
P. pubescens in the neighbourhood of Innsbruck, then about 1794 
in the Tyrol by Wulfen, and then again in 1867 by Prof. Kerner 
apparently in its original habitat near Innsbruck. In reference to 
the other side of the question Mr. Baker, who has given consider¬ 
able attention to the subject, published in the Chronicle of June, 
1885, his views of the origin of the garden Auricula :—“ From the 
widely spread and well-known P. Auricula, L .,” he says, “ this 
P. pubescens differs in having leaves shortly pubescent all over the 
surface, and especially on the margin, conspicuously inciso-crenate 
in the upper half, pubescent bracts, calyx, and pedicels, ca’yx teeth 
more acute and as long as the calyx tube, dark lilac flowers, and 
the whole plant—leaves, bracts, pedicels, and calyx—almost entirely 
destitute of fine white meal. It seems to me quite impossible to 
take a walk through any Auricula show with this Primula pubescens 
in memory without feeling that Prof. Kerner’s paper is very far 
from having exhausted the whole subject. My own view is that a 
very large proportion of the garden Auriculas are nearer to P. 
Auricula than they are to P. pubescens, and that the garden 
Auricula of the present day is the product of a complicated series 
of intercrossings, of which P. Auricula, Balbisii, venusta, and 
pubescens have also entered.” Stein believes that our very dusty 
English Auriculas are not only relatives of P. pubescens, but we 
get them through the fertilisation of this hybrid with P. Palinuri. 
P. pubescens grows from 3 to 6 inches in height, flowers in umbels, 
.a dozen or more in each, dark lilac or brilliant rose colour, with 
golden-yellow eye ; leaves obovate, cuneate, 2 or 3 inches long, 
pubescent all over, the upper half being crenate. Tyrol. Flower¬ 
ing April and May. Syn., hirsuta, Vill. ; rhaetica, Gaud. ; helvetica, 
Don ; alpina, Reich. ; villosa, A it. ; microcalyx, Lehm. —D. 
OPEN-AIR PEACH CULTURE. 
Not a few persons appear to imagine that Peach trees cannot be 
grown to fruit so satisfactorily on open walls as they used to be in 
years gone by. This is erroneous, and the sooner the delusion is 
dispelled the better. The want of cultural attention is the founda¬ 
tion of the imperfect examples of Peaches seen at the present day 
•on open walls. Before entering on details I wish to say a few words 
on the training of the trees. We frequently hear it stated that 
gardeners in past days spent much more time than was necessary in 
the production of their trees, that the culture now practised is more 
to the point, and that the results, according to the time spent on the 
trees, are superior. This is the argument at the present day, but is it 
not more fanciful than real ? The originators of so-called new 
methods generally go to extremes to prove their case, and their 
ideas are taken for granted by younger men and used as a cloak to 
cover slovenliness in management. Whether the old gardeners went 
slashing about their trees wholesale for the first four or five years of 
the trees’ existence, as we are led to suppose they did, I do not 
know ; but as long as I have been connected with private gardens 
and nurseries the trees have been grown on the rational principle, 
and I maintain that they can be grown under this system so as to 
produce far more satisfactory results as regards fruitfulness, and with 
far les3 trouble in after years, than when the trees are of irregular 
shape and the branches badly trained. 
During the first years of the tree’s existence it takes no more 
time whatever to lay the shoots and main branches straight, and to 
keep the tree well balanced, so forming a handsome example, than if 
the shoots are laid in anyhow and often crooked, as some suppose to 
save time. Well-balanced trees with straight branches denote 
rational treatment, and instead of being “ tree worship in its worst 
form ” is tree culture in its best form. I maintain that not only is 
no time wasted in securing the shoots straight as growth proceeds, 
but in after years not nearly so much time is required to keep the 
trees in order as those treated in the higgledy-piggledy fashion, and 
well-trained trees are certainly not less productive than those 
fastened to the wall irregularly. I have more than once been 
amused when showing well-balanced trees to strangers to hear them 
remark that they “ could not spare time to train them so well; ” but 
they could find no fault with the crops. 
The soil best adapted for the Peach is a calcareous loam, with the 
under stratum either of the chalk or limestone formation. Where a 
soil of this description does not exist naturally the site must be 
prepared similarly to when making a border for indoor culture, care 
being especially taken with the drainage, as a dry subsoil means 
warmth at the roots. In moist parts of the country, and where the 
soil is cold or clayey, the border should not be more than 20 inches 
in depth and 8 feet in width, and should be made above the level of 
the ground. The fertility of the soil must be maintained by top- 
dressings. I have now in mind a grand wall of Peach trees, 
which bear heavy crops annually. The border is of the same width 
and depth as stated above, and is above the ground level. Their 
culture can be summed up in a few sentences : Protection from 
frosts whilst in bloom, freedom from insects, plenty of water during 
the summer months if the weather prove dry, mulching with equal 
parts of lime rubbish and well-pulverised horse manure, the growths 
and main branches evenly distributed, and after the fruits are 
gathered the old bearing wood cut out, so that the bearing wood 
for next season receives full light and air are essential. On 
warm evenings through the summer months the foliage is. much 
benefited by a good shower-bath of tepid soft water applied with the 
syringe, or, what is better, the garden engine. We have used clear 
soot water with marked benefit to the foliage, and it also tends to 
keep red spider away. Black aphides are especially to be guarded 
against, for when these gain a footing it is “ all up for the present 
and following season’s crops. The best antidote we have used is a 
quart of tobacco water to three gallons of soft water, heated to the 
temperature of 120°; syringe the trees with this on mild evenings, 
and early the following morning, before the sun gains power, syringe 
with clear water. —A Young. 
ORCHID NOTES. 
Manure for Orchids. —I must congratulate “ An Amateur ” on 
the able manner in which he is dealing with the “ Hints on Orchid 
Culture.” I have read his notes with much interest, and now write 
to give a little of my experience with manures for Orchids. 
It is very likely that there are various manures most suitable for 
various genera of Orchids, but my experience is very limited both in 
regard to the number of manures and genera experimented upon. 
The only artificial manure I have tried is “ Clay’s Fertiliser," and its 
effects on terrestrial Orchids have been beneficial, but when used for 
several epiphytal species it has killed the sphagnum and been of 
doubtful utility to the plants. A friend had a similar experience 
with another artificial manure upon several species of Odontoglos- 
sums—in fact, their roots were partially destroyed ; but as I am not 
quite sure as to the identity of that manure I will not attempt to 
name it. 
The manure I have used with great advantage consists of half a 
peck of soot and half a bushel of fresh horse manure placed in a bag 
and suspended in a barrel of rain water. This liquid manure is used 
in varying strength for all kinds of stove and greenhouse plants as 
well as Orchids, and for general utility and safety I find it difficult 
to surpass. In its application to Orchids the terrestrial kinds have it 
once a week ; when in full growth the colour of strong tea, or if 
given twice weekly it is more diluted. This same manure I have 
applied advantageously to Coelogyne cristata, Miltonia spectabilis, 
Cypripedium barbatum and C. insigne, Oncidium ornithorynchum, 
Odontoglossum Schlieperianum, Lmlia purpurata, L. anceps, Pilumna 
fragrans, Stanhopeas, Acropera concolor, Lycaste Skinnerii, L. gigantea, 
Brassia verrucosa, Zygopetalum Mackayi and Z. maxillare, Epiden- 
drum vitellinum majus, Phalsenopsis Schilleriana, Dendrobium crystaj- 
linum, D. chrysanthum, D. chrysotoxum, D. cretaceum, D. crassinode, 
D. Devonianum, D. fimbriatum oculatum, D. macrophjdlum (superbum) 
gigauteum, D. nobile, D. Paxtoni, D. Parishi, D. primulinum, 
D. heterocarpum philippinense, and D. Wardianum ; and in all cases 
its use has been attended with most satisfactory results. I believe 
the cause of the improvement is the ammonia the manure contains, 
and possibly by a per-centage of carbonic acid, but that would be 
very small. 
What is the reason’ that many Orchids appear to have a great 
liking for charcoal ? Is it not because the carbon of the charcoal 
has an affinity for the ammonia in the atmosphere, and thus absorbs 
and retains it for the use of the Orchids ? There is a very common 
impression amongst gardeners that plants show a liking for charcoal 
for its own sake, but I am informed that is a popular error.— 
A Northern Orchid Grower. 
Trepho. —In your issue of the 11th inst. your correspondent, “ An 
Amateur,” in his very able and interesting “ Hints on Orchid Cul¬ 
ture ” refers to the introduction of Trepho as a substitute for peat for 
growing Orchids, and perhaps you will permit me to inform your 
readers of the facts of its introduction. Some two or three years 
