March 13, 1890. J 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
225 
position of the various parts, seolusion, an agreeable transition from 
one part of the garden to another without any decided break to disturb 
the harmony of the design are further principles which are always 
borne in mind by the successful landscape gardener. There is, however, 
one principle which must always be remembered by designers of a 
garden, and that is adaptation, for without adaptation no rules, no 
principles that can be given, will be of any real value. Every plot of 
land, whether it be half an acre or whether it be a hundred acres, has 
its own peculiar characteristics which should influence the disposal of 
its various parts, and give colour and variety to the whole design. It is, 
in fact, the delicate adaptation of the various rules, styles, and prin¬ 
ciples of treatment to the peculiarities and existing objects of each 
place, that brings credit to the landscape gardener and satisfaction to 
the owner. 
(To be continued.) 
MANNERS AND CUSTOMS—A CATALOGUE COMMENTARY 
(Continued from page 203.') 
Comtesse Panigee (Nabonnand, 1877).—Of fair growth, with fine 
foliage ; not liable to mildew, and does tolerably as a dwarf ; a full 
Rose, which therefore will not stand any rain and requires a hot bright 
sun. The petals are stout and good, and I had a fine bloom off my first 
plant, but have never had so good a one since. Not above the average 
size, and very changeable in colour. I see it is described in one cata¬ 
logue as “ rosy bull shaded with carmine and violet,” which certainly 
seems sufilciently comprehensive, but amateurs will find that a great 
many of these Tea Roses come practically white ; and the reason of this 
is, I suppose, that they are described as first seen under glass, but that 
out of doors they only open properly in bright hot weather, and then 
the sun “ takes the colour out.” 
Comtesse Rha du Parc (Schwartz, 1876).—Of strong hearty growth, 
with good foliage, not liable to mildew or much injured by rain, late in 
blooming, not a good autumnal, and preferring a standard stock. This 
Rose “ comes” very badly indeed, and a good shaped one is a decided 
rarity. It is not large nor a free bloomer, and has only survived from 
its colour, which is a charming shade of pink, with an indefinable sensa¬ 
tion of yellow pervading it, especially at the base of the petals. It is 
already dropping out of the catalogue, but a good Rose of its colour 
would be heartily welcomed. 
Devoyeiensis (Foster, 1838).—Of moderate but sturdy growth, nearly 
as thorny as Comtesse de Nadaillac, with small foliage ; not very liable 
to mildew, nor (as becomes a native of Devon) as impatient of rain as 
some Teas. The strong blooms often come divided, but it is pretty good 
in petal, shape, centre, and size, though very liable to injury from frost. 
For a long time this was the best English-raised Tea Rose, and till lately 
it was highly rated, but now seems to me to be deteriorating. At all 
events, one does not see it shown so often as formerly, and I can do no 
good with it, as it appears to object strongly to being grown as a dwarf. 
Two catalogues at least describe this Rose as “ pale yellow.” I cannot 
tell why compilers fight so shy of the word “ white,” hut they always 
seem to me to avoid it if they can. 
Climbing Devoniensis CP&Yiit, 18.58).—I have not noticed the climb¬ 
ing sports of the H.P.’s, as they seem to me to be of little practical value, 
since the blooms are generally inferior to the type, and better pillar and 
wall Roses are to be found among the Noisettes, Gloire de Dijons, Ayr¬ 
shire, Evergreen, or Banksias. Some nine or ten are catalogued, and 
oddly enough they are mostly sports of varieties which have quite a 
short growth naturally. This Tea Rose, however, “ out-herods Hetod ” 
in differing from the Devoniensis type, which (as we have seen) is 
of quite moderate growth, but the climbing variety is the strongest, 
most untidy, and irregular grower we have. Growing is its strong 
point, and it sometimes nearly omits the flowering part of the business 
altogether. A strong long shoot of the Gloire de Dijon or Noisette 
races, if laid in well and uninjured by frost, will bloom freely all 
up the rod. But not so Climbing Devoniensis. Away it goes again (if 
well treated on a south wall) from the top bud of last year’s shoot, and 
its sole endeavour seems to be to get to the top of the wall as quickly 
as possible, and as a plant to look as bare at the base, ugly, and lopsided 
as it can. The great pithy, thorny, flowerless shoots are very susceptible 
to frost, and are not handsome at any time. But I have seen it show 
better manners, growing moderately and blooming freely throughout the 
summer on a south wall, where no attention was paid to it; and I believe 
this desirable state cf affairs was attained by simple starvation, but the 
buds were small and only useful as passab'e buttonholes. 
Ernest Mttz (Guillot, 1888) and Ethel Rrownlom (Dickson, 1887) 
will, I hope, prove desirable members of our family, and set a good 
example in manners in general behaviour ; but they are too juvenile as 
yet to have their characters described. 
Etoile de Lyon (Guillot, 1881) is thus described in a catalogue of 
this season :—” This, without question, is one of the finest Tea Roses' 
ever raised, and one which it will be difficult to supersede. It Is a gem 
in every sense of the word, producing freely large and well formed 
flowers.” Amateurs in general will probably not endorse this. The 
description, which is exaggerated under any circumstances, was no doubt 
taken from the Rose as seen under glass. This is necessary in the case 
of new Roses, but we look for more accurate characters of Roses eight 
years old. It seems to me a very disappointing Rose out of doors. It 
does well as a dwarf, and has good stout growth and foliage, rather 
liable to mildew, but the blooms come generally badly, of confused and 
queer shapes, and require as a rule very dry warm wxather ; yet did 
better, oddl.y enough, in the cold wet summer of 1888 than many others. 
It is what I call a disappointing Rose all round ; for, when you do- 
get a well shaped and regular bloom from a strong and very stout shoot, 
it is surprising how small and insignificant it looks when set up beside- 
other Tea Roses cut from much slenderer and weaker stems. This ia- 
partly accounted for, no doubt, by the thoroughly globular shape, and 
by the outer petals being short, and kept close up to the rest of the- 
bloom. Those are always the most effective shapes where the outer 
petals are the longest, and stand well away from the flower like great, 
wings. It is something of the shape and colour of Monsieur Furtado, 
though larger, as indeed it ought to be, considering the great difference 
in growth. These two, Etoile de Lyon and Monsieur Furtado, with 
Madame Bravy and Marie Guillot, always seem to me the true types, if 
not the only perfect specimens, of the globular shape in Roses. 
Francisca Kruger (Nabonnand, 1879).—A Rose which found little 
favour at first, but now yearly improves and increases in reputation. 
Of good growth and foliage, doing well as a dwarf, not much liable to- 
mildew, and, when once it has commenced to expand, but little hindered' 
by rain. It comes occasionally malformed or even with a green eye,., 
but is often very perfect in form. A very free bloomer, and a good 
autumnal; the small buds are lovely in colour and shape, and a strong 
plant well thinned and attended to is capable of producing very fine- 
exhibition blooms, large enough to show with H.P.s, and very lasting. 
A beautiful Rose, of very varied and changeable colour, strong largo 
specimens when fully out, often showing an attractive and universal 
shade of yellow through all the inner petals. 
Gloire de Dijon (Jacotot, 1853).—Perhaps the best known of all 
Roses. There can be little doubt that this is not a pure Tea, but has 
a cross in it of some other race, for the plant is absolutely hardy, of 
very vigorous climbing growth, and the foliage is unlike that of the 
Tea-scented China, and similar to that of Grace Darling. Like the 
Noisettes, Roses of this race must not have the strong young shoots 
pruned back, or wood instead of flowers will be produced ; but, when 
this is understood, no Rose, save the common (dhina or “ Monthly,” 
blooms so profusely and constantly, early and late, as the one under 
notice. Dean Hole says, ‘-Were I condemned to have but one Rose 
for the rest of my life, I should ask, before leaving the dock, to bo 
presented with a strong plant of Gloire de Dijon.” Exhibitors arc 
often blamed for neglecting Roses of real sterling merit like this one; 
but, though it has indeed many merits, it is not a show flower. A plant 
of (iloire de Dijon may be a hundred times the size of one of Comtesse 
de Nadaillac, and may have more than a hundred times the number of 
blooms ; but take the finest Gloire de Dijon that ever was seen, and 
set it in a stand by a fair representative bloom of the other, and tho 
great inferiority in every respect, even in size, would at once be manifest. 
The foliage is very fine indeed, but not so evergreen as Mar6chal Niel 
and some other of the Noisettes, nor does it clothe the bases of_ the 
branches so well as Reve d’Or. It is not liable to mildew, cares little 
for rain, and its bushels of blooms come very true to shape (which is 
weak to a florist’s eye), and unusually uniform in colour. Last, bui 
by no means least, among its good qualities, it will grow and flourish 
almost anywhere and anyhow, tolerably well even on a north wall. A 
Rose of such notoriety, which forms seed vessels freely, has naturally 
been a prolific parent of Roses of similar manners and customs, form¬ 
ing a race to themselves. Perhaps the best of these are Bouquet d’Or 
(Ducher, 1872), which, strange to say, is classed among the Noisetteo 
in all the catalogues which I have seen except those of the N.R.S. and 
of Mr. G. Paul.—W. R. Raillem. 
(To be continued.) 
W. Allek Richaedsov. 
A LITTLE boy on being reproached with his bad manners and cus¬ 
toms which were contrasted with the good ones of another little boy is 
reported to have said, “ Perhaps so, but then he’s been better brought 
up than I have.” The “ W. A. Richardson” described by Mr. W. R. 
Raillem in your last issue is never recognised by me or my family. If 
we meet him we do not see him, and this is not because we are proud, 
but because we are all so tall and such good climbers, although we don’t 
approve of the custom which applies that term to Roses, that anyone 
less ambitious is known to have been badly brought up by those to 
whom he was entrusted in his early days, and to have acquired such low 
manners and customs as to preclude our acknowledging him. This is 
further shown by his producing a “very small ” flower, and not all the 
care your correspondent and our friend may have lavished on him 
since he came to live with him will eradicate the faults thus early 
acquired. 
We all certainly produce flowers sometimes nearly white, sometimes 
orange, and generally orange-ye low, edged with white, our true colour. 
