Jane s, 1890. J 
JOURXAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
471 
that which it is said to be like. Thus we find the term Vegetable 
Oyster applied to the root of Salsafy, because by some it is supposed to 
taste like oysters. Again, we have the term Vegetable Ivory applied 
to the nut of Phytelephas macrocarpa, because in appearance and 
texture it bears so strong a resemblance to ivory as to be capable of 
being used for several purposes. Again, the Stillingia sebifera is called 
the Vegetable Tallow plant, because tallow is obtained from its seeds. 
In all these, and I might add some others, there are sufficient reasons 
why the term vegetable should be applied to them, but neither in 
appearance, texture, or taste has the Stachys the slightest resemblance 
to whitebait. Jly object was, after having grown it myself and obtained 
what information I could from the firm who introduced it, to warn 
people against being led away by the love of novelty to grow a thing 
which is not only absolutely worthless as a vegetable, but is a horrible 
weed in the garden. I forbear to notice the very childish remarks 
which close “ A City Man’s ” notes. Such a system of interpretation 
might make words mean anything, reminding one of the statement of 
a learned scholar of the middle ages, who stated that because the phrase 
“ abommable idolatries ” occurred, that therefore therejmust be some 
idolatries which were not abominable.—D., Deal, 
WEATHER EFFECTS ON CROPS. 
In our district the weather and its effects on vegetation have been 
of a most unusual character. During winter we were almost free 
from frost; yet except during the abnormally hard winters ten or a 
dozen years ago, no season has been productive of more mischief. We 
lost Violets, Sweet Williams, Pinks, Chrysanthemums, &c., many of 
them absolutely dead to a plant. Nor is this experience confined to one 
garden. It seems to have been general. The reason appears to be that 
the exceptionally mild moist weather completely spoiled plants for 
standing the slight frost which did occur. The season also showed how 
difficult it is to forecast the times of such a crop as Broccoli. Between 
a cold slow season and a quick season like that just past there would 
be a difference of quite six weeks in some midwinter sorts. Almost the 
whole of Snow’s and Veitch’s Spring White was cut before the end of 
December, and Sutton’s Late Queen was over by the 12th of May, quite 
four weeks earlier than in a medium season. 
Now as to the spring months, no doubt the remarkable feature has 
been the unprecedented amount of damage of which small birds have 
been the cause. They began by the end of January on Apricots, Plums, 
Peaches,and Pear8,andcontinu^withoutintermissionuntil the beginning 
of May ; the Gooseberry, Red and Black Currant, and Apple blossom 
have suffered greatly. I find opinions vary as to the particular birds in 
different localities, but no doubt bullfinches, chaffinches, and sparrows 
are the chief offenders. Raspberries and Cherries seem to have escaped 
their attention. Then during the period of the flowering of Plums and 
Pears the weather for three weeks was dull, cold, or close. There was 
little p)ollen, and hardly any fruit set. The loss to big growers of 
Tomatoes solely on this account must be considerable. Plants have set 
at the bottom then a piece of barrenness, and lately, beyond this, the 
setting process is again being proceeded with. Much the same pecu¬ 
liarity has been exhibited with Muscat Grapes. Early bunches are well 
set, as also later ones, but the bunches which flower during the time of 
evil are practically bare skeletons. Rain is wanted badly for the 
Strawberry crop, which is very promising. Apples also would set much 
better with a little more moisture, but these and Cherries are almost 
sure to set well. Apricots set a large crop.—B. 
ROYAL NATIONAL TULIP SOCIETY. 
The Exhibition of the above Society, which took place in the 
Botanical Gardens, Old Trafford, on the 28th ult. (the last day of the 
great Whitsun Exhibition of the Manchester Botanical and Horti¬ 
cultural Society), proved a success far beyond the most hopeful anticipa¬ 
tions of the Committee. It is true that exhibitors in the south, like 
Mr. James Thurston of Cardiff, could take to Manchester only the 
remains of his Tulip blooms, in common with Mr. T. Haynes of Warwick ; 
while Mr. Samuel Barlow, of Stakehill House, Castleton, required 
another week to bring his flowers to perfection. But the fixture suited 
the Cheshire and the great body of the Lancashire gi^owers of Tulips 
exactly, and very large numbers of fine flowers were staged in the best 
condition—in fact, it was said to have been one of the largest and best 
exhibitions seen in Manchester for many years. The flowers were 
staged in the end portion of the spacious Concert Hall, and double the 
space of table room originally provided was covered with flowers. The 
visitors to the Manchester Society’s Show, who also enjoyed the privilege 
of seeing the Tulips, appeared to wonder at the difference between 
feathered and flamed flowers ; between bizarres, roses, and bybloemens ; 
and especially between the self-coloured and shaded breeders, and the 
rectified flowers. Many lovers of flowers are unaware that a seedling 
Tulip at the first time of blooming almost invariably takes on a self- 
coloured or breeder form, and in this state they are technically termed 
“ breeders and season after season as they are grown, now one and 
now another, in no order of rank or age, will rectify or break, as it is 
called, into either flamed or feathered flowers, or at some attempt at 
either. Those who grow Tulips can easily distinguish between a bizarre, 
a rose, or a byb’oemen breeder. A bizarre breeder has a yellow base, 
and the marking or colour is laid on in black or red, or many shades of 
brown and brownish red, and some are nearly yellow. A rose breeder 
has a white ground marked with rose, red, or scarlet, or some inter¬ 
mediate shade of these, and many of them are very beautiful. A 
bybloemen breeder has also a white ground, and in these the colour 
varies from light lilac to blue and violet, and some are almost blact. 
A feathered flower when broken or rectified has the colour laid on as 
pencillings only round the petal edges, or in the case of a flamed flower 
this pencilling is joined by bold beams of colour that rise like fire 
flashes up the petal centre, and strike into the pencilled edges. Many 
beautiful breeders break into sadly degenerated forms ; some dull 
coloured and ugly breeders into correct and finely formed blossoms. 
More than ordinary interest attached to this exhibition from the fact 
that the Trustees of the Turner Memorial Fund offered special prizes 
for Tulips in two classes. The first was for twelve dissimilar Tulips,, 
to consist of six rectified and six breeder varieties. This was won by 
Mr. Samuel Barlow, J.P., Stakehill House, Castleton, Manchester, with 
a very even and bright fresh lot of medium-sized flowers, consisting of 
bizarres William Wilson, feathered ; and Sir J. Paxton, flamed ; roses-. 
Modesty, feathered ; and Mabel, flamed ; bybloemens. Duchess of Suther^ 
land (Walker), flamed : and John Parkinson, feathered; breeders, 
bizarre. Sir J. Paxton and Hepworth’s 27 a ; roses, Annie McGregor, of 
a beautiful bright rosy scarlet colour ; and Mrs. Barlow ; bybloemens-,. 
Glory of Stakehill and William Parkinson. Second, Mr. J. H. Wood, 
Royton, with bizarre. Masterpiece, feathered ; and Mrs. Lomax, flamed 
bybloemens, Adonis, feathered ; and Talisman, flamed; breeders, 
bizarre. Sir J. Paxton and Lord Delamere ; bybloemens, Storer’s Al2.i 
feathered ; and Alice Grey, flamed ; roses, Annie McGregor, feathered ; 
and Miss Burdett Coutts, flamed. Third, Mr. W. Kitchen, Stockportv 
The other class was for six dissimilar seedling Tulips, three rectified and 
three breeders, and here again Mr. S. Barlow was first with bizarre. 
Gill’s seedling, feathered ; bybloemens, Johnson’s Bob Morley, flamed p 
and rose, Hardy’s Miss Hardy, flamed ; of breeders one of each class, 
all seedlings raised by the late Mr. John Hepworth. Mr. James Thur¬ 
ston, Richmond Road, Cardiff, was second with bizarre, feathered 
bybloemens, flamed, and rose flamed, and two bizarre and one bybloe¬ 
men breeders ; all his own seedlings. One stand was disqualified from 
having two bybloemen breeders the Judges regarded as not distinct. 
The leading class, the cup class as it is termed, was for twelve dis¬ 
similar Tulips, two feathered and two flamed of each class. There wei* 
six competitors, and Mr. James Knowles, Staleybridge, was placed first 
with a very good stand of well-marked, full-sized flowers, consisting of 
bizarre Sovereign and Sir J. Paxton, feathered; Sir J. Paxton and Dc. 
Hardy, flamed ; roses. Heroine and Modesty, feathered ; May Tints and 
Triomphe Royale, flamed ; bybloemen Amazon and Talisman, flamed p 
Mrs. Hepworth and Conersby Castle, feathered. Second, Mr. W. Kitchen, 
with a good lot of flowers also, having bizarre Masterpiece and Tyjxj, 
feathered ; San Josef and Typo, flamed ; roses, Minerva and Comte de 
Vergennes, feathered ; Mabel and Queen Henrietta, flamed ; bybloemen 
Violet Amiable and Trip to Stockport, feathered ; Adonis and seedling,, 
flamed. Third, Mr. S. Barlow ; and fourth Mr. J. H. Wood. In the 
class for six dissimilar Tulips, one feathered and one flamed of each 
class, out of eleven competitors Mr. Daniel Woolley, Stockport, was 
first with bizarre Typo, feathered, and Sir J. Paxton, flamed ; roses, 
Mabel feathered, and Olivia, flamed ; bybloemen King of the Universe, 
feathered, and Walker’s Duchess of Sutherland, flamed. Second Mr. W, 
Kitchen, with bizarre Paul Pry, feathered, and San Josef, flamed ; roses, 
Comte de Vergennes feathered, and Clio flamed. Third, Mr. A. Moor- 
house. Fourth, Mr. T. Haynes, Warwick. Then followed a class for 
the same number of Tulips, but the competition was limited to half¬ 
guinea subscribers, and there were four competitors. Here Mr. H, 
Housley was first with bizarre Lord Lilford, feathered, and Sir J. 
Paxton, flamed ; roses, Alice, feathered, and Annie McGregor, flamed 
bybloemen Agnes, feathered, and Lord Denman, flamed. Second, Mr. 
R. Wolfenden, Royton, with bizarre Masterpiece, feathered, and Sir JL 
Paxton, flamed ; roses Heroine, feathered, and Mabel, flamed ; bybloemen. 
Talisman, feathered, and Duchess of Sutherland, flamed. Third, Me. 
W. Prescott, Lowton. Fourth, Mr. S. Johnson, Stamford. 
In the class for three feathered Tulips there were ten entries, and 
here Mr. S. Barlow was first with bizarre Sir J. Paxton, rose Annie- 
McGregor, bybloemen Violet Amiable. Second, Mr. James Knowles, 
with bizarre Storer’s Seedling, rose Industry, and bybloemen Conersby 
Castle. Third, Mr. R. Wolfenden. Fourth, Mr. W. Dymock, Stockport. 
There were seventeen stands of three flamed Tulips, the flamed flowers- 
being always in excess of the feathered. Here Mr. H. Housley was first 
with bizarre Sir J. Pexton, rose Annie SIcGregor, bybloemen Lord Den¬ 
man. Second, Mr. Thus. Holden, Royton, with bizarre Sir J. Paxton, 
rose unknown, and byb'oemen Lord Denman. Third, Mr. A. Moorhouse. 
Fourth, Mr. Thomas Haynes. There were sixteen e.xhibitors in the 
class for two Tulips, one feathered and one flamed, Mr. J. 11. Wood being- 
first with bizarre Masterpiece feathered, and bizarre Sir J. Paxton 
flamed. Second, Mr. W. Prescott, with bizarre Lord Lilford feathered,, 
and Sir J. Paxton flamed. Third, Mr. H. Housley. There was a similar 
class for maiden growers, a maiden grower being defined as one who had 
not at any one show won the amount of his subscription. Out of three 
competitors lilr. John Hayes was first with unnamed bizarres. Second, 
Mr. Sami. Johnson, Stamford, with bizarre SirJ. Paxton flamed, ami 
bybloemen Lord Frederick Cavendish feathered. Third, Messrs. Stuart 
and Mein, nurserymen, Kelso. 
Single blooms were very numerously shown, and the Judges were 
engaged for a considerable time in making their awards. Bizarre 
feathered—first, Mr. B. Simonite, Sheffield, with Masterpiece; second 
