232 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
I arc * 21,1889 
branches to excess, and this can be done so as to produce ulceration 
to any extent, and I believe that if specimens of this artificial 
canker and of others where it is the result of an obscure cause were 
mixed together, not one person out of twenty could separate 
them. Whether the ulceration is caused by manipulation or not 
the result is the same in the effect on the roots, and they are 
deprived of their foraging power in proportion to the injury 
sustained by the branches. Anyone can prove this who wishes to 
do so, and I think more easily than he can find out the exact 
special ingredients required by each variety of plant or tree. 
Mr. Tonks scores a point on the question of duration of 
experience. I was well aware his term of activity was longer than 
mine, when I took him at his word in saying his attention was 
specially directed to plant food in 1886. I confess I did this for 
the purpose of eliciting a retort, and now observe his writing to 
the Journal of Horticulture in 1861 was on another subject, and was 
two years subsequently to my practice with the Ribston Pippin 
that proved so satisfactory to the owner of the tree. This hastily 
written article is by no means a complete reply to my accom¬ 
plished opponent, and I hope to return to the subject, and may 
here add that I had the great pleasure of spending a night with 
Mr. Tonks last week, and after closely inspecting his fruit trees I 
am able to record that the canker on them appeared in every case 
to have been arrested ; but while recording that fact most willingly 
and gladly I am not yet a convert to the whole of his views. His 
garden is highly interesting, and I expect few men could spend an 
evening with its owner without gaining knowledge during the 
agreeable interview and discussion on soil exhaustion and restora¬ 
tion.—W. 
It is plain that Mr. Tonks has not yet got to the bottom of 
canker. When I asked for an explanation of certain matters in 
connection therewith— e.rj., root-pruning, curing, or mitigating 
canker, cutting down, curing it, and why one young tree should be 
taken and another left, I expected Mr. Tonks would have known 
all about such cases. Shortly, then, I have seen cases where 
simply cutting in the roots has stopped canker in old trees. 
The theory (which I have no wish to be considered as correct) I 
adopted to explain this was that the supply of food of a dele¬ 
terious nature was cut off just in the same way as it occurs after 
a hot summer and autumn that canker is for the time stopped and 
a healing of wounds takes place. 
M ith regard to trees cut over being free from canker in the 
new growth, I can assure Mr. Tonks I have at the present moment 
trees larger in branches than those cut down. Moreover, by 
cutting out cankered branches and leaving healthy ones, I have 
brought many trees into a healthy condition, the young growths 
coming perfectly clean. As to the third case cited, I may say that 
it was not isolated. I have noticed canker in young budded trees 
several times. At the present time I have at least one example ; 
and indeed it may be safely said that canker in some shape will 
attack trees at any age. I have thought it might be a fault of the 
stock, but that does not explain why some kinds invariably canker 
on any stock. That soil has an effect I am quite prepared to 
concede, for sorts which canker here do perfectly well on another 
class of soil. 
Eesults depending on soil it is well known apply to other crops 
as well as fruit trees ; as for instance, varieties of Potatoes doing 
well on one soil and failing on another. The double forms of 
Primula vulgaris are another case in point, some of these abso¬ 
lutely refusing to keep alive in some soils ; but where Mr. Tonks 
errs is in supposing that the application of a chemical food will 
make up for soil deficiencies. All experience, I make bold to say, 
proves that theory to be incorrect. If it were possible by the appli¬ 
cation in sufficient quantity of manurial foods to make certain of 
the development of plant life, then it would follow, that however 
infertile the natural condition of the soil, the farmer has simply to 
a PPly proper quantity of the necessary materials, and the rocky 
peat sril of Hal way would be as valuable as the brown loam of 
East Lothian ; or the sandy uncultivated “ links ” of the latter 
county would compete with the cultivated alluvial soil. Does 
Mr. Tc nks concede that, or if not, how far is he prepared to go ? 
— R. P. Brotiierston. 
JUDGING FRUIT. 
It is mainly due to the free expression of opinion upon any question 
or system that a change can be effected where necessary ; consequently I 
beg permission to reply to one point referred to by Mr. Mclndoe where 
our views seem to diverge — namely, the uniform standard of value. 
Mr. Mclndoe contends that there is no injustice done in jud<nn°- 
codections of fruit by this method, because “ Grapes are compared 
with Grapes, and Gooseberries with Gooseberries.” This looks like an 
equitable mode of procedure, but when we come to sum up the totals 
the result is not so favourable. For example, suppose the opposing 
dishes of Grapes were good productions, the one being slightly better 
than the other, receiving standard value 6s., the other 5s. 6d. The 
same process is carried on all the way down, until we arrive at Goose¬ 
berries, which are also extra good samples of their kind, and to be 
consistent we must treat them in the same way, the best receiving 
standard value Gs., the other not being perfect obtaining 5s. 6d., or- 
equal to the value of the Grapes. But unfortunately the collection 
with the best Grapes may have the worst Gooseberries, and if they 
stood on equal terms before, the slight difference in the Gooseberries 
would settle the matter. Possibly Mr. Mclndoe may say, “ Quite right,”' 
and that the dfference in quality should decide the merits of the 
collections, seeing they were equal before, but the consensus of opinion 
will be that the difference between two dishes of Gooseberries and two 
dishes of Grapes should not balance ; or, in other words, that Gooseberries 
should not have the same weight in the aggregate as Melons or Peaches- 
—Judex. 
I find the recent severe weather has caused many blanks in the- 
Rose borders. So far, the worst with us are the following—Reynolds 
Hole, Alfred Colomb, Lady Sheffield, Madame G. Tournier, Ella Gordon, 
Brilliant, Georges Moreau, Louis Van Houtte, Mons. E. River, Countess 
of Oxford, and Mary Pochin. Others considerably affected are Benoit 
Comte, Gloire Lyonnaise, Lord Macaulay, Lord Bacon, and Ferdinand 
Chaffolte. Hybrid Teas in the open, with the protection of a few 
branches of Gorse, have passed uninjured.—T. H. S., Beds. 
JUDGING TREBLES. 
With a view of arriving, if possible, at some definite conclusion as to- 
the mode of procedure which should be adopted in judging trebles E 
venture to offer these few remarks. By the term “ trebles ” is under¬ 
stood those classes where Rose blooms are staged in threes - e.g., “ twelve 
varieties, three trusses of each,” and the point, that appeals for settle¬ 
ment is, Are they to be judged as twelve trios or as thirty-six individual 
blooms ? 
In “A ‘Symposium on Judging” in “The Rosarian’s Year Book’’for 
1889 we find two opposing statements on the point from two most 
eminent judges ; the one a professional, the other an amateur. The- 
former writes “Until .a rule be added to the existing rules to the 
effect that one imperfect bloom makes the whole three bad, judges should- 
deal with the merits of each individual flower.” The latter states :— 
“ With regard to the question of judging trebles my opinion has always- 
been that the treble must be judged as such, and not by individual 
blooms.Let the treble be regarded as one flower.” 
Now, until last Rose season, I should not have hesitated to say that 
the one and only method adopted in judging trebles was in accordance- 
with the second of these two statements. But a case occurred by whicht 
it appears that this is not the universal method. The case was this. I 
was asked to assist a well known local amateur to judge the whole of 
the nurserymen’s classes at last year’s Manchester Rose Show. When 
we came to the treble classes we dealt with them according to mode 
No. 2, the trebles being regarded as one flower, and, no matter how ex¬ 
cellent the other two blooms might be, if the third bloom was a bad 
one the treble was considered a bad treble. Now, I believe I am right 
when I say that in judging the amateur classes the judges took the 
opposite course and dealt with them according to mode No. 1 ; not as so- 
many trios, but as individual blooms. The result was this : We staged 
expecting to be judged by mode 2, and I have but little doubt that 
one, if not bo'h, judges of the amateur division staged their trebles on 
theory 1. In short, we were at cross purposes for want of a rule to- 
guide us. If I am wrong the judges referred to will, no doubt, correct 
me. 
I need hardly point out how different the staging of trebles would be- 
in the one case to the other, but will only observe that before the season 
arrives something definite should be laid down by the National Rose 
Society as to the way in which trebles are to be judged.—J. H. P. 
ROSE3 IN POTS. 
Although our gardens have from time to time been enriched with) 
so many floral gems since the Rose first became cultivated and improved- 
by enthusiasts in this country, yet it still commands the greatest share 
of admiration from the greatest number. In gardens where Roses are 
largely grown in pots so as to yield a supply of flowers during the 
months when they cannot be obtained from the open air, it is customary 
to reserve some for bringing on gradually in a cool house, so as to get 
them in flower a little before they can be obtained from sheltered posi¬ 
tions out of doors. Where such has not already been done no time 
should be lost in having them pruned and taken under glass. In per¬ 
forming this operation I have found it best td cut out all the weak 
shoots, as they only produce weak growths and small flowers in return, 
besides keeping the bushes in a crowded state. Shorten those left to 
