April 15, 1885. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
291 
used, but a friend to whom I mentioned the subject tells me he assisted 
to make a Vine border several years ago. It was composed of sandy turf 
and inch bones. The turf was used dry, and was well trod ien when 
made up. The border was top-dressed every year with some half-decayed 
turf and bone dust. Five years after making a trench was opened at the 
edge of the borders about 2 feet wide, and the whole depth. The trench 
was again filled with fresh turf and bones, thus keeping the roots in the 
border and furnishing fresh food. Abundance of water and liquid manure 
was given, and the produce was good enough to win prizes in first-rate 
company. I have seen bones used with heavy loam with no perceptible 
benefit, but with a sandy soil where lime is deficient I believe bones will 
furnish all the lime necessary. 
A writer in recommending fish potash manure confirms my opinion 
that Vines may be grown with a positive manure, and there is then no 
danger of the exhaustion which is likely to follow the use of caustic lime. 
Mr. Bardney’s assertion that his borders are rich in humus appears to require 
explanation when it is rem-mbered he uses 10 per cent, of caustic. 
I'h.nker ” points out the usual per-centage of lime in a fertile soil. Does it 
not occur to him that it exists a 3 carbonate of lime, and not as hydrated or 
caustic lime ? If it is necessary to use a heavy dressing, chalk is better ; 
it is quite as useful to prevent clubbing, may contain a little phosphoric 
acid, and will not destroy the humus so rapidly. The only cases in 
which I would use such a dressing of quicklime would be in a newly 
drained bog, or such heavy land as “ Thinker ” describes, and even in the 
latter case I am not sure that burning part of the soil, as recommended 
by F. H. Cobbam, would not have been as well. 
“ Thinker” and Mr. Bardney say the addition of lime will not cause 
the loss of much ammonia from the soil, but an experiment I made seems 
to prove the contrary. I took three tin canisters, punched holes in the 
bottom of Nos. 1 and 2, put a few crocks in the bottom, and covered them 
with turf. In No. 1, I put some heavy loam without fibre, containing 10 per 
cent, of added lime, and covered it with half an inch of loam. No. 2 was 
not covered. I then filled the canisters with water in wh'ch I dissolved 
eulphate of ammonia at the rate of a handful to two gallons of water. I 
put the lids on, and in five minutes on taking them off I could smell the 
carbonate of ammonia, and on a feather wetted with vinegar being held 
over them a white vapour was given off. No. 3 had 20 per cent, of partially 
decayed horse droppings mixed with the loam and lime, and after the 
canister had been covered for a time, the ammonia, although it did not 
smell so strong, was escaping, as the vinegar proved. Mr. Bardney 
has evidently a strong prejudice in favour of newly slaked lime, and is 
consequently unfitted to judge the soundness of my views, but whether 
the readers of the Journal agree with me or not, I hope they will believe 
I had no unworthy motive in writing.—A. L. Gr. 
[No one, we feel sure, can question the motives of our correspondent. 
His object is admittedly to impart information, and he takes pains to 
ascertain the correctness of his views. This is highly commendable, but 
Mr. Bardney in recording his experience on page 190 did not say that 
1 Yines cannot be grown well if bones are used.”] 
THE PRIMULAS. 
( Continved from page 27G.) 
P. sinensis, Ldl. —Although not a hardy Primrose is of suffi¬ 
cient interest to deserve notice here. It may be easily grown by 
those having a small greenhouse and a little heat at command 
to assist in raising the seed. It was introduced to this country 
about the year 1821, and was introduced to Breslau, Germany, 
by Treviranus in 1826, when the plants were priced at 9s. each, 
and although called the Chinese Primrose from its first introduc¬ 
tion, its native habitat has always been doubtful until Yun nan 
was explored by M. Delavay, when it was found growing wild in 
that locality. It is needless to recount the various and striking 
improvements that have taken place in this Primula since its 
introduction, the forms being endless, single and double of all 
forms and sizes; the strains are also numerous. I am unaware 
of any attempts to hybridise this with some of our less fioriferous 
kinds. There is every reason to believe that something could be 
done in this way, and although the progeny might not be hardy 
they would probably stand rougher handling than the type. 
Syn., P. praenitens, Kef; chinensis, Lour. 
IP. spectabilis, Tratt .—This species, type specimens of 
which I have n it yet seen in cultivation, seems to be very valuable. 
Taking a broad view of it (and you will find intermediate forms 
to support it), there seems to be every gradation between the 
very hairy P. Kitaibeliana, through Wulfeniana, to the large- 
leaved spectabilis and Clusiana, the latter apparently the other 
extreme. In Wulfeniana the leaves are pointed as in the type, 
getting more obtuse with Kitaibeliana until they become rhom¬ 
boid in Polliniana. P. spectabilis grows from 3 to 6 inches in 
height. Leaves large, shiny green on the upper surface, obscurely 
dentate, ovate-shaped, pointed, and more or less erect. The 
scape terminates in a head of from three to six large deep lilac 
flowers, surrounded by an involucre of narrow linear bracts. 
Flowers April and May. 
The variety Kitaibeliana, Schott, answers in general character 
to the above, with the exception of the leaves being hairy, 
distinctly crenated, and more obtuse. Yar. Polliniana, Mor .— 
Almost orbicular leaves, pitted and covered with a transparent 
glutinous substance. Margins cartilaginous, wavy, irregularly 
serrated or dentate. 
The variety Wulfeniana, Schott, is perhaps the best known 
of the above. The leaves are lanceolate or slightly spatulate, 
glabrous, shiny green, cartilaginous margins Flowers larger 
than in the type, with the exception of Polliniana, which is 
rather difficult to establish. The others may be readily estab¬ 
lished on rockery. A light free soil mixed with small pieces of 
granite rock we find suits them well with an eastern or western 
exposure. Natives of Croatia, Carnio’a, Austrian Alps, South 
Tyrol, &c. Flowering April and May. 
P. Steinii, Obri-st .—A hybrid between sub-minima X hirsuta. 
It is most nearly related, as will be seen, to the minima group, a 
near ally to P. Forsteri, a'so a cross between the same parents, 
but super-minima instead of sub (after Stein). It is by far the 
easiest of this group to cultivate; more Horiferous than P. minima. 
Generally with a two or three-flowered scape, and not unfrequently 
flowering twice in a season—in spring and again towards the 
autumn. It thrives best in a soil abundant in calcareous matter. 
Much the size and habit of P. minima. Leaves in largish rosettes, 
obovate spatulate, terminating with from seven to nine large 
teeth, with thinly scattered glandular hairs along the margin. 
Scape carrying two or three large flowers, violet purple with a 
white centre; flowering in April. It is found in the Central 
Tyrolean Alps along with its parents, where it was found in 
October, 1878, by J. Obrist, of the Innsbruck Botanic Garden, 
and we believe has not since been found. 
P. St earth, Wall, andP. purpurea, Royle, are, in our opinion, 
the two least satisfactory for garden purposes of all the Himalayan 
Primroses yet introduced, and according to Sir J. D. Hooker its 
position seems to be equally unsatisfactory. He says, “ This is 
one of the most common and puzzling of the Himalayan Primulas, 
if indeed there be not two or more species included under it, 
with possibly hybrid intermediates. P. denticulata, which 
inhabits lower levels, and P. petiolans, from still lower, are the 
only equally wide spread and Protean Himalayan congeners. 
The original P. Stuartii was founded by Wallich on a yellow 
flowered plant, well figured in the “ Bot. Mag.” t. 4356. P pur¬ 
purea, published later by Royle (illustrations) t. 77 was founded on 
a purple-flowered one, which I find it impossible to distinguish by 
any other character from P. Stuartii, the two presenting a parallel 
series of varieties in the size, shape, mealiness and crenature of 
the leaves, number of flowers and bracts, and the shape and 
comparative lengths of the calyx lobes and capsule. P. Moor- 
croftiana, Wall, founded on miserable fragments collected in 
Western Tibet by Mooreroft, is a third supposed species, which 
is obviously a small state of purpurea. I suspect that all— i.e.. 
Stuartii, purpurea, Moorcroftiana, and lineariloba, are forms of 
the beautiful P. nivalis, Pall, of Siberia and Central Asia.” 
Besides the difficulty of keeping them until they are large enough 
to flower, they rarely if ever survive after that takes place, and 
a well-known grower has suggested their being biennial, an 
opinion we are inclined to agree with. A large plant of P. Stuartii 
we remember having seen in flower on the old rockery at Kew a 
few years ago, and which we found had never been seen after¬ 
wards. Stuartii has flowered at various times, but purpurea I 
have never seen, nor has anyone to whom I have spoken about 
it. The seed germinates freely, but f have never seen the seed¬ 
lings live beyond the second year. We grow them in peaty soil 
in a northern exposure. P. Stuartii grows between a foot and 
18 inches in height. Leaves all coming from the root, broad, 
lanceolate, pointed, sharply serrated, and covered on the under 
surface with a golden yellow meal. The flowers varying from 
ten to twenty, ai’e produced in an umbel surrounded with narrow 
bracts, each flower about an inch in diameter, yellow, with an 
orange centre, and drooping as in sikkimensis. _ it was found by 
Royle at an elevation of 9000 feet, and flowered in the Edinburgh 
Horticultural Society’s Garden 1847. It flowers July. Var. 
purpurea, Royle, much the same as the above, but with purple 
flowers and sulphury meal on both sides of the leaves. Syn., 
macrophylla, Don, jjaeschkiana, Kern. Other varieties are ma- 
crocarpa, Moorcroftiana, and lineariloba. 
P. Sturii, Schott (minima X villosa, Kern). — Found in Steier- 
mark in 1856, and about which Professor Kerner says it is very 
probable that the plant found by Zahlbruckner on the Waldhorn 
Alps, a short distance south of Schlaehning in Steiermark, and 
described, 1820, as P. truncata, Lclnn, and which Lehmann later 
determined to be minima var. pubescens, is a cross between 
minima and villosa, but without personal knowledge of the 
locality where Zahlbruckner found the plant, and without having 
seen the original specimens I cannot settle the question. If the 
suggestion is proved the name truncata must be kept up and 
