S64 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
; May 1890. 
evidence of his ability, for he was promoted as journeynian some time 
before the expiration of his apprenticeship. Prom there he went 
to Bothwell Castle, under the veteran Mr. Turnbull, where he remained 
about four years, and then came to Kegent’s Park under Mr. 
Marnock, chiefly with the object of seeing horticulture as practised in 
and around London. He next removed to Wrotham Park, Barnet, 
then under the management of his brother Mr. William Thomson, 
and Mr. D. Thomson attributes much of his after success to the 
experience he gained at Bothwell Castle and Wrotham Park. His 
first charge was as gardener and general manager to Mr. Drummond, 
then head of the banking firm at Charing Cross. After two years’ 
service there he left, much to the disappointment of his employer, and 
took charge of the gardens at Dyrham Park. It was there that such 
important work was performed in transforming a strong yellow clay 
into a fertile soil by an elaborate process of burning which has been 
described in this Journal. After eight years’ residence at Dyrham he 
left, again with great reluctance on the part of his employer, and took 
charge at Archerfield, near Drem in East Lothian. These gardens he 
rendered celebrated for flower gardening and fruit culture. Pines and 
Grapes were admirably produced, and his ten years’ work added 
materially to his fame as a cultivator. Leaving there he entered on 
his duties as head gardener at Drumlanrig Castle in 1868, under the 
late Duke of Buccleucb, and there he has performed most valuable 
services, remodelling the glass, and proving in every department his 
skill and experience as a gardener. 
Mr. D. Thomson has also done good work as a writer and author, his 
treatises on “ The Pine Apple,” “ Fruit Culture under Glass,” and the 
“ Handy Book of the Flower Garden’’ being standard works in a horti¬ 
cultural library. He also began writing for the Press when twenty years 
of age, and for twenty-five years he was a constant contributor to The 
Scottish Gardener ” and “ The Gardener,” and for some years he edited 
the latter. For a considerable period he has been a contributor to the 
Journal of Horticulture, and his writings are always appreciated for 
their practical useful character. 
There is little to add except that a public recognition of Mr. 
Thomson’s merits was accorded him a few years since in the award of 
the Niel prize in the north, and the Veitch Memorial medal may there¬ 
fore be said to be a corresponding testimonial from his southern friends 
and admirers. 
THE KEVISION AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE 
PICOTEE CLASSES. 
BY THE KEV. F. D. HOBNEB AND MB. E. S. DOBWELL. 
In my paper on pages 34, 35 of our Annual Report, 1 have given my 
reasons for the note appended to the yellow ground section in onr last 
schedule of prizes, and the objections, as they appear to me, lying against 
the existing system followed in the case of the white ground Picotee. 
“ Colour being the rule of selection, we reject arbitrarily and barbar¬ 
ously, in the case of the Picotee, every hue or combination of hues not 
distinctly either a red, or purple, or salmon, pink, or rose. And, sub¬ 
dividing the colours into heavy edged and light edged sections, we leave 
out, and make of no account, the whole of the medium or feather 
edged varietiesthat is, in the case of the single bloom classes. 
It appears to me that this is most unsatisfactory, and to threaten, as 
it is extended, yet more undesirable results. Fitly years since we had 
two classes in Picotees for single blooms. We now have six, and I 
observe, from the copy of the schedule of prizes sent me, our friends of 
the National Carnation Society extend it to eight, without, however, 
covering the objection I have referred to as the medium edged class, or 
including every hue or combination of hues developed in the flower. 
Resting upon colour it is exclusive, and unless we are to set up classes 
for every shade, a reductio ad aimrdam, will ever remain so. 
I propose, therefore, in the case of the white ground Picotees, to 
rest the division upon the breadth of the marginal colour—an easily 
understood and perfectly feasible arrangement in the case of the cur¬ 
vilinear edged flowers, and dropping all requirement as to colour—to 
ofier prizes in three divisions : (1) broad edged, (2) medium edged, (3) 
light edged. W'e may thus do away with the reproach of hard and fast 
lines of exclusion, sometimes, and in this case justly as it appears to me, 
laid against us, and adopt a rule which, whilst allowing every hue or 
combination of hues in the flower to be brought forward, would require 
the selection, not to depend upon the preference of individuals for par¬ 
ticular colours or shades of colour—a subject upon which tastes may 
legitimately diSer—but upon well defined and well understood intrinsic 
merits. Of course this proposition touches only the curvilinear edged 
flowers. Longitudinal markings rest upon a very different principle ; 
therefore, in place of the regularity of marking so harmonious in the 
curve, we have the marvellous variety of Nature for our guide. 
I shall be glad to hear from you at an early date, and to be advised of 
any point you may think germane to the subject.—E. S. Dodwell. 
Many thanks for your leaflet on the “ Revision and Redivision of 
the Picotee Classes in Single Blooms.” At present, there is to the 
medium edge, no locus standi, except among the heavies, where it is 
practically a weaker vessel—a light heavy, so to say—and, therefore, of 
short weight. As things are, we cannot give this style of Picotee its 
fair expression, and so I think the main divisions in single blooms might 
well and happily be heavy, medium, and light. But I would certainly, 
by no means whatever, run all the edge colours together. It would, I 
think, be too much centralisation ; and single blooms, classed only by 
depth of edge, would be unwieldly, perplexing masses, incapable of 
sufficient gradation and recognition in awards, except by some such 
inordinate length of class prizes, that all attempts at comprehending 
the magnitude of the prizes at planetary distances from the first, would 
be vain. The colours of the edges are great natural divisions, forming 
very easy bases of distinction on the whoie. Some tints, indeed, so 
verge and merge that two descriptive names are better than one—c.y., 
“ rose or salmon edge ”—but this, I think, would be less confusing than 
mixing up one type of marginal breadth in “compote” of all the 
colours that edges come. I think that your resting “ division upon 
the breadth of the marginal colour ” would rather give scope for, than 
put restriction upon, “ the preference of individuals for particular 
shades of colour.” In a mixture of all the colours in a class constituted 
alone by depth of edge, there would simply be the fullest opportunity 
for a judge to side with his favourite edge colour. Whereas, with each 
type of colour separate in its own type of depth in edge, there is none 
but the safe choice of “ Hobson ” possible, so far as colour goes. If we 
get a new colour—say, blue (!)—let us have heavy, medium, and light- 
edged blues if they arise. I do not take you for one to be frightened by 
the “ ’arf-a-brick” charges of exclusivism heaved at us as florists. Never 
mind what the outer critics say. What they call exclusive, we term dis¬ 
tinctive. I think decided edge colours in Picotees are more satisfying than 
nameless blends, just as in the Auricula we disfavour the “ undecided 
edge,” and in the Tulip the “ rosy bybloemen,” as being variably between 
two classes, and weak flowers in either. The Ranunculus, I know, is 
hardly ever wrong in colours ; but she has peculiar class colours in her 
•' roans ” and “ olives,” capable of wide classification. (I don’t know, 
how “ roan-edged ” Picotee would sound or look 1) Far am I behind 
you in familiarity with varieties of the Picotee—past and present, new 
and old. But I fancy there are not many that could not be classed 
under the existing types of colour : and that, if these were given a. 
triple expression by depth of edge, as heavy, medium, and light edged 
flowers, in purple, red, and rose edges, we could adequately classify the 
Picotee as we have it. As for myself, I grow only more and more “ hard 
and fast ” in many florist ways. I would, and do seek new develop¬ 
ments, and none would more warmly appreciate some new type of 
beauty, “on well understood intrinsic merits.” Only 1 cannot away 
with un-florist forms of florist flowers, as ranking with and among- 
florist flowers. That is the point. They are right and pretty among 
themselves; and in “a flower show,” as generally understood, they 
would be a legitimate feature. But in special shows of a special 
society, for the development of a flower in special lines of its beauty, it 
seems to me to be idling with our time and space to introduce flower® 
that are beside the mark, or simply represent the shortcomings in our 
efforts. In this light they irritate my eyes as would an ill-spelt word, 
or a piece of execrable grammar ! I fear and feel I don’t quite “ pan ”■ 
with you and Brother Barlow on this point. Well, never mind me I I 
will go and be “hard and fast.’’ It may be sterner work, but the 
opposite would be more melancholy to me, even from the impression I 
have never forgotten of seeing an old florist so enamoured and lost amid 
the bewilderment of keeping nearly everything he raised, for the sake of 
some point of beauty, that he did not know at last when he had a bad 
one, and saw nothing better in the best flowers at the National Show 
than he had in many a hundred truly weak sorts. But here is a long 
yarn—let me wind it up !— F. D. Hoenee. 
THE SPARROW PEST. 
Yotr ask on page 300 if anyone can say how to get rid of the 
sparrows, and one asks if they can be poisoned. In dealing with the 
matter, it cannot be too stricdy borne in mind that it is felony to lay 
poison, to destroy any wild bird or wild animal outside a covered build¬ 
ing. The reason of this law will be apparent when it is remembered 
that the poison might be eaten by a stray dog, fowl, pigeon, hare, 
rabbit, &c., and might lead to a family of persons being poisoned. 
The main reason sparrows have increased so enormously in the past 
few years is on account of the “Wild Birds Protection Act,” of which 
the public are annually reminded by a certain Society, on all the walls 
of the country, and the penalties persons are liable to who take or kill, 
or attempt to take or kill, or have wild birds in their possession ; but 
they do not say what birds are protected and what are not, therefore- 
let it be remembered that sparrows are not included, and, moreover, any 
person can take or kill any protected wild bird on land in his own occu¬ 
pation, or instruct anyone else to do so. 
Now, whatever may be said in favour of sparrows, they certainly are 
not insect eating birds ; they live entirely on seeds and vegetables. It is 
against their nature to do otherwise, as may be seen by the shape of 
their bills. They do some good in eating a quantity of weed seeds, but 
this is about all, and as a natural result of their feeding they are about 
the most toothsome article I know of, and this brings me to the “ key ”■ 
for their extermination. In London we find in every part eel pies, 
lark pies, and pork pies, in fact pies made of everything but sparrows. 
I believe that if sparrow pies were included there would soon be such a 
