December 2G, 1889. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
559 
manure for a couple of days, and then returned to a good temperature, 
where they soon filled their pots with roots, and are now as healthy 
both in root and foliage as one would desire, and nearly every bulb has 
flowered. They had abundance of water as soon as the roots got to the 
sides of the pots. Having no means of baking the soil, a hint received 
from the Journal, I followed what I considered the better plan of the 
two, in subjecting it to the heat of the manure heap, which also materially 
enriched it. Anyone having any suspicion of mite about their bulbs 
should try this plan. — W. Simpson, Knowsley. 
From the report of the annual meeting of the National Rose Society, 
which meeting I was unable to attend, it appears that another clause 
was added to section 8 of the “ Regulations for Exhibitors.” The section 
now runs thus : “ All Roses must be exhibited as cut from the plants. 
Artificial aid of any and every kind is strictly prohibited, with the 
exception of wire or other supports, which are to be used only to keep 
the blooms erect. Dressing Roses so as to alter their character is also 
prohibited, also the insertion of any additional foliage.” May I be 
permitted to offer a few remarks upon the clause which relates to the 
dressing of Roses ? 
I presume the term “ dressing,” as here applied means the manipula¬ 
tion of the bloom by the exhibitor in order to present it in its most 
perfect form, in his opinion, before the eye of the Judges. This result, 
however, may, or may not be attained. 
Someone may say dressing never used to be heard of in connection 
with the queen of flowers, can it be necessary now? Yes, in my 
humble opinion it is in many cases quite necessary ; for of many sorts, 
especially of the newer varieties, introduced within the last fifteen years, 
the robustness of the plants and the size of the blooms, together with 
hard pruning, thinning, and disbudding, have caused the flowers in 
several instances to be unable to develope themselves to their utmost 
capacity unless they have a little assistance. Dressing is practised by 
some of our exhibitors, and those not the least successful, and the man 
who neglects it does so at his peril. 
Now with reference to the words, “ so as to alter their character.” 
Dressing is by this clause officially recognised. It is not as a practice 
that it is condemned, but only when we come to the result of dressing 
that pains and penalties threaten us. If the character of the Rose is 
preserved all is well; if, on the other hand, the character is altered or 
the bloom spoilt, disqualification is to be the punishment. But before 
this disqualification can be made, two points must be clearly proved— 
First, that the Rose is out of character; second, that this loss of 
character is the result of dressing. With regard to the first point 
take Souvenir de la Malmaison for an example, and consider in 
how many forms she presents herself—the flat, the cupped, and the 
globular high centre; or how variable the shape of Beauty of 
Waltham, sometimes like Alfred Colomb, Marie Baumann, or Benoit 
Comte. I venture to say it would be difficult to decide positively that 
a certain Rose is out of character. But suppose you have found such 
a bloom, you have next to decide the second point, that this alteration 
of character is the result of dressing. This you have to prove, but on 
what evidence ? If you are a judge you have no right to stand by and 
watch the staging of exhibits you are soon to judge. How are you to 
obtain conclusive evidence that this particular bloom in question has 
been dressed 1 
Now I come to the worst part of the whole case. This question, as 
I understand it, does not rest s lely with the judges, their decision is 
final only with reference to duplicates—see rule ix. The disqualification 
can be made at any time before or after the awards have been made 
by three members of the Committee, even after the exhibitor himself 
has gone home to prepare for the next show, and so unable to defend 
himself. I much regret that this clause, so difficult to carry out, has 
been added to our rules, more especially as it is unaccompanied by the 
necessary safeguard to all peace and goodwill, that the judges’ decision 
shall be final.— Joseph H. Pemberton. 
Two Good Late Flowering Roses. 
La France amongst the bushes and Souvenir de la Malmaison 
amongst the climbing sorts are the two most prolific late flowering sorts 
I have any experience of. Both are pale in colour, both bloom so pro¬ 
fusely as hardly to form sufficient wood to extend them. They are 
grand blooms, delightfully fragrant, and all who desire to have many 
Rose blossoms in perfection in October or even November should grow 
both.—B. 
MANNERS AND CUSTOMS —A CATALOGUE COMMENTARY. 
( Continued from page 530.') 
Dr. Andry (Verdier, 1864).—Of capital growth and foliage, not 
much injured by mildew or rain, almost always comes well formed, im¬ 
bricated with a point, early, of good size, good in petal, centre, and 
colour ; lasts fairly well in shape, but not so well in coloui ; very free- 
flowering, a row of it making a grand show for a few days, but not so- 
good as an autumnal; a useful and thoroughly reliable Rose of strong 
constitution, which will do fairly in weak soil. 
Dr. Sewell (Turner, 1879).—Rather weak in growth and foliage,, 
liable to mildew and to burn, but not much injured by rain. Does not 
often come thoroughly good, but when it does is a fine distinct dart 
Rose of good shape and size, but not of high quality as a free bloomer 
or autumnal. 
Duchesse de Caylus (Verdier, 1864).—See Penelope Mayo. 
Daehesse de Morny (Verdier, 1863).—Of fair growth and foliage in. 
good soil, the wood and leaves being very distinct and characteristic. 
Liable to mildew, but will stand some rain. The blooms come well 
shaped with very smooth stout petals, beautifully full, of distinct and. 
lovely colour, large size, and fair lasting qualities. This Rose is one of 
the very smoothest and regular in globular imbricated shape that wa 
have ; a free bloomer, but not so good in autumn, and rather dainty as 
to soil and treatment. The shoots often come wholly or partially 
fasciated— i.e., laterally jointed together, either for a short distance or 
right up to the bud, and the buds should be well thinned, for this is one 
of the sorts where no fear of coarseness need be entertained. 
Duchesse de Vallambrosa (Schwartz, 1875).—Of very strong distinct 
growth and foliage if it does well, but will not thrive everywhere. Not 
very liable to mildew, but cannot stand rain at all, and being of a very 
light colour may be injured by thrips in a dry season. The blooms have 
a decided tendency to come badly shaped, often with me having a gap 
or chasm in the outline, as if a wedge had been cut out. The shape isr 
rather too open at the best, but it is of large size, fair in lasting 
qualities, and as an autumnal. 
Duke of Edinburgh (Paul & Son, 1868).—Of strong good growth ancf 
foliage, with characteristic wood ; the secondary shoots are very long, 
and rather spindly and pliable, so that the blooms are sometimes 
pendant. Not very liable to mildew, or much injured by rain. Gene¬ 
rally comes true to its shape, which is good so long as it holds its point ; 
but the petals are not very stout, or the centre very full, and it is not a 
good laster. Of full size and most brilliant colour, vermilion crimson. 
In strong specimens the crimson predominates when the bud shape is 
passed, but the self vermilion, which is generally found only on the- 
weaker blooms, is perhaps the most effective. Not very lasting in shape 
or colour, but of large size, a free bloomer, and fair autumnal. This was 
for years the brightest of all red Roses. It was “ The Duke ” par excel¬ 
lence , as Baroness Rothschild was “ The Baroness,” though Duke of 
Wellington, not so bright, was of earlier introduction. A lady friend 
used always to pounce upon any red Rose in my garden that showed 
extra brilliance, saying that she knew what that Rose was—it was the 
Duke of Edinburgh. Of good hardy constitution, but rather apt to 
run to wood instead of to bloom, especially in autumn and on the. 
Manetti. 
Duke of Tech (Paul and Son, 1880).—Very like the last-named in 
most particulars. I do not know if there is any relationship ; but 
different in colour, having much less of the dark crimson, and perhaps 
not quite so brilliant. The shape is also rather more globular and less 
pointed, but other manners and customs are the same. 
Duke of Wellington (Granger, 1864) is marked in some catalogues as 
moderate—I p., weakly—in growth, but is quite fair in vigour and 
foliage with me. Not very liable to mildew or much injured by rain, a. 
free bloomer, and quite a good autumnal. The blooms come well in 
what I call the pointed form, and consider the finest shape of any.. 
First class in petal and fulness, and grand in dark crimson colour and 
lasting qualities. Medium in size according to the N.R.S. catalogue, 
which I can quite believe to be the case where the growth is moderate, 
but well up to the average with me. Will not do in hungry soil or 
where not well treated, but high feeding and close pruning will gene¬ 
rally produce splendid blooms. Older than the Duke of Edinburgh, and 
in spite of general repute, the best show Rose of the two with mr. 
This is one of the Roses which close their petals in the evening, thus 
seriously disconcerting at times those exhibitors who have to choose their 
blooms at those hours. 
Dupuy Jamain (Jamain, 1868).—Of very strong, stiff, stout growth- 
and foliage, with vigorous clean smooth shoots, such as a Rose should 
have. Not liable to mildew, and but little injured by rain (I ought to- 
say that almost all H.P.’s are sometimes attacked with mildew, except 
perhaps Paul Neron and Ulrich Brunner, and all are better without 
rain, so not liable must be generally taken as not specially liable). The 
round fat shoots of Dupuy Jamain produce round fat smooth blooms,, 
which generally come well shaped, but the petals are not so stout as 
they look, and the centre is weak in hot weather. Of large size, but a 
bad laster ; very free in bloom, and perhaps the best of all autumnals- 
of its colour. If 1 wanted a red Rose at the end of October I should 
come here first, and if any H.P. will bloom at Christmas this will. A 
good and reliable cool season Rose, of strong hardy constitution, which 
will grow almost anywhere. 
Earl oj Dujferin (Dickson, 1887).—I have not had this Rose long 
enough to enable me to particularise its habitual manners and customs. 
I am afraid it has its little ways in requiring fine weather, and perhaps 
sometimes coming rough in outline, but it is not fair to speak of the- 
habit of a variety till it has been tested daring different seasons. 
Edward Morren (Granger, 1868).—Of extra strong thorny growth,, 
with rather rough foliage. Not liable to mildew, but being very full is 
very apt to be injured by rain. This is one of the coarse Roses, too full 
in petals, often badly shaped, and rarely symmetrically arranged. Ic 
