April 25, 1839. J 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
331 
determine for themselves some of the questions which are debated 
concerning them. 
The season of 1888 was, as we all know, a very peculiar one ; 
everything was later than usual, and the character of the National 
Auricula Society’s Exhibition was materially affected by this 
circumstance, the number of plants exhibited being much smaller 
than usual, and those which were there came from growers who, 
according to modern ideas, use what our “ forbears ” would have 
scorned—fire heat ; but not only were they late, but they were 
mostly out of character. Flowers which are “ long on their way ” 
arrive at the end of their journey somewhat jaded and used up— 
and thus, when the truss appears, and yet weeks pas 3 before it 
5s developed, it loses much of its brightness and beauty. This was 
the case with me at any rate last season, and I very much fear that 
it looks as if 1889 would follow suit. It may be said, Is not this 
an argument for the use of fire heat ? Perhaps so, but then the 
advantage is counterbalanced by the drawn appearance and weakly 
condition of the flower stems, which require therefore to be staked, 
thus destroying what the older florists considered an essential point 
in a good Auricula, that the stem should be able to support the 
flowers unaided ; the same rule that flowers which are delayed 
long in the bud are never equal to those which have a genial time 
for growing and opening holds good with other flowers. How 
often do we find this with the earlier blooms of the Rose spoiled 
by their coming with green or hard eyes, and with imperfectly 
developed petals. 
I have already alluded to a fact which ought to quicken all 
Auricula growers into greater activity—namely, that some of our 
best flowers, in fact the two very best grey edges in growth, 
Headley’s George Lightbody and Cheatham’s Lancashire Hero, seem 
to be losing constitutional vigour. I remember some years ago a 
friend, whom I knew to have an intelligent and enthusiastic gar¬ 
dener, saying that he could not get good plants of George Light- 
body. I thought then that perhaps it was an exceptional case, 
but I have heard it from so many good growers, and it has also been 
asserted in the columns of the Journal, I fear that we must admit 
it as an acknowledged fact. Suppose that they still further decrease 
in vigour, have we anything amongst the varieties raised of late 
years to take their place ? I say advisedly no. Why it should be so 
I cannot say. Here were men who never thought of hybridising, 
who knew none of the niceties stated to be necessary for the 
•successful raising of seedlings, yet who have raised flowers which 
excel all their efforts. But it is the same with other flowers. 
Probably the three finest (each in their way) Roses in growth are 
Marie Baumann, Marechal Niel, and Gloire de Dijon, yet they are 
absolutely chance flowers. Nature, in the shape of bees or moths, 
did the work better than the hybridisers did it. 
Of the newer flowers I have not many, but I have found Con¬ 
servative (Douglas) a good flower, although its edge is too often 
one of those undecided kinds which are neither white nor grey. It 
is classed amongst the whites, but is as often a good grey. It is 
very difficult to get a good plant of ■ it owing to its giving off 
offsets ; in this respect resembling Read’s Acme and Traill’s 
Beauty. Sylvia (Douglas) is a good flower, but not equal in quality to 
Conservative, and does not increase so rapidly as that does. Sapphire 
(Horner) I have only a small plant of, and consequently it did not 
bloom, but it is of a peculiarly taking colour. I have not been 
extravagant enough to buy Heroine, as, not being an exhibitor, one 
is hardly justified in paying the price that it brings. The Rev. 
F. J). Horner (Simonite) is a good flower, but I am not quite sure 
as to the position it will ultimately occupy (its paste does not seem 
very solid), for seedlings, like young people, are apt to be rather 
wild in their ways. They put on an appearance of sobriety and 
well-doing, then all at once break off into bad ways, and become 
“ ne’er do wells.” So it was with Ajax (Horner), which received a 
first-class certificate and had a high-sounding name, but of which I 
de not think the raiser would boast much now. 
I have already said that with regard to the question as to 
whether it would be sounder advice to a beginner to tell him to get 
together a collection or to select only a few extra good kinds, and 
seed from them and grow seedlings, and that if a person more 
ambitious, and one, moreover, wanted to experience the pleasures of 
disappointment, and it may be success, the latter would be the better 
course ; but that there was no reason why a grower so inclined 
should not try both. I hold it to be floricultural prudery to refuse 
to grow a florist’s flower because it is not perfect. We grow Roses, 
for instance ; but how few of them are really perfect ; and we 
grow a vast number with which a connoisseur might find fault; and 
so I think it is with Auriculas. We take for example the most 
numerous class of edged flowers, greys. There is a vast deal of 
difference amoDgst them, either in the colour of the body colour, 
the tint ani textures of the grey edge, the c flour and character 
of the tube, and the general appearance of the fliwer ; so that to 
those who are amongst them there is no difficulty in distinguishing 
each variety ; and until we get a number of really good and 
distinct novelties free from defects we shall, I think, be wiser in 
the old adage, “ Not to throw away dirty water until you have got 
clean.” Keep to the old varieties until you can replace them with 
newer and better varieties. 
Your correspondent, “ W. J. M.,” is in error with regard to the 
woolly aphis. I was not the first to draw attention to it ; I believe 
it was Mr. Llewelyn of Penilerg ire who sent it to the Royal 
Horticultural Society, when the little beast was named, figured, 
and described. Mr. Horner was the first, I believe, who drew public 
attention to it, for in the “ Florist and Pomologist ” for 1876 he 
thus wrote, “ The last pest I notice is new to me this year, and I 
am thankful to say is not in my own collection, but I know of its 
presence in two. It is a mealy bug or aphis, apparently identical 
with the American blight ; it seems a terrible thing, infesting the 
roots, permeating the soil, starting apparently from centre of decayed 
vegetable matter in the compost, destroying the fine white fibres of 
the plant, and causing it to have a languid, dull, set look, very 
noticeable and distressing. I do not know the cause, unless it be 
from leaf mould too crude and gathered near trees—say, from a heap 
laid up in an orchard where the blight had hold. For its remedy 
I would suggest shaking it free from all soil and wash the leaf and 
root in a solution of softsoap and water, and afterwards in clear 
water. Petroleum we know to be deadly poison to the woolly 
aphis, but I think that a flavour of it in the washy mixture would 
not damage Auricula roots, and might be some additional security. 
I should not, however, venture on it with valuable plants, but trust 
to washing and a sweet new soil.” It was no wonder that a state¬ 
ment like this from so eminent an authority put us all in a flutter, 
and that every Auricula grower in the kingdom looked to his 
collection. I found it on mine, and brought some of it to show to 
friends, and believed my collection was doomed. So far did the 
dread of it influence some growers, that I know of one who would 
not take his plants to a show for fear that they might catch the 
infection! And now see what a change. The views entertained by 
Mr. Horner then are not those held by him now. Experience has 
shown him where they were wrong. The aphis, though allied to 
the American blight, is not identical with it, and has long existed 
in our gardens ; it is found on the roots of Primulas, and also on 
the Sow Thistle, Lettuce, ani other things. I fought against it 
for some years, and I fear often in the fight my plants suffered, and 
now I quietly contemplate them, and do not care whether it is there 
or not. Perhaps I had rather not have it there, but I do not worry 
about it. 
At one time I fancied we were going to have an early bloom 
this year, but it is not so ; plants hang very long on the way, but 
as far as my own collection is concerned the flowers seem to be 
coming very true. Frost has not crippled them, and as I have a few 
new varieties I am looking forward to the blooms with interest. 
—D., Deal. 
NOTES ON EARLY ENGLISH HORTICULTURE. 
(i Continued from page 128 .) 
Hosv singularly at times we gather up curious facts in unex¬ 
pected quarters. The somewhat uninviting records of Gray’s Inn, 
near Holborn, give us a bit of very interesting history which has 
to do with horticulture. Gray’s Inn gardens, previously rather 
neglected, it would seem, were planted by order of Francis Bacon, 
Lord Yerulam, in the spring of 1600 ; positively there is the exact 
date, April 24th. Particulars and prices are as follows 66 Elms at 
9d. each, 8 Birches at 8d., 16 Cherries at 12d., 18 Apples at 16d., 
30 Eglantines— i.e., Honeysuckles, at 12d. To this enumeration 
the chronicler adds 1000 red Roses and 200 Osiers. Apparently 
there is a mistake here as to the quantity purchased, but the grow¬ 
ing of Rose 3 and Osiers tells us that the air of that part of London 
was not impure then, and the soil moister thin it is now. But 
Lord Bacon was so many-sided a man that it doss not astonish us to- 
find he studied gardening, and published an essay upon the subject. 
In this he advised an increased culture of evergreens, disapproved 
of artificial devices in gardens, though he approved of the free 
lopping of hedges and trees ; also he advocated the reserving, in 
each garden of sufficient size, a space where Nature could be left to 
herself. Nor was he merely a theorist, for Sir H. Wotton says that 
Bacon’s garden was one of the best he had seen in any country. 
This was, I presume, at Twickenham Park, which was long his lord- 
ship’s residence. Amongst the many friends of Sir H. Wotton was 
Lord Zouch, a man well known at the Court of Elizabeth, and one 
of the nobles who took a pleasure in horticulture. At Hackney, 
where we know not, Lord Zouch had a nursery, physic garden, and 
orchards. It is stated that he caused much wonderment by his 
l success in removing Apple and Pear trees thirty or forty years old. 
