September 6, 1894. 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
219 
that form ; nor yet that it will not dissolve soluble and insoluble 
plant food in the soil.” 
Had Mr. Bishop not written the last sentence here quoted he 
might fairly contend that he was simply referring to the rising 
of moisture in the soil. Bat he did not stop at that, he went on to 
say that he did not deny that roots could absorb actual water. 
Why this denial if he was not contending that roots absorb some¬ 
thing else, which he states is not actual water ? 
Mr. Bishop’s quotations from standard authorities in support 
of the numbered statements I have put before him will, I am sure, 
be most interesting.—D. Gilmour. 
I HAVE read with keen interest the correspondence in con¬ 
nection with the nutrition of roots in the Journal of Horticulture, 
and hoped to profit by the same without penning any remarks. 
As Mr. Bishop, however, makes statements on page 169 which are 
a little at variance with my meagre knowledge of both science and 
practice, I feel almost compelled to ask him a few que-tions in 
order that that knowledge may be augmented and my mind set at 
rest. 
Your correspondent makes bold to assert that inorganic sub¬ 
stances are raised from a lower stratum to the surfac i of the soil 
by the means of water vapour. Can Mr. Bishop give us any proof 
that this is so beyond a mere assertion? Unfortunately I have 
found noth ng in science to bear out his teaching, f nd in practice 
the proofs have always been in an opposite direction. For instance, 
put an ounce of salt into a quantity of water, place the same in a 
vessel, put it on a fire, and we will evaporate all the water, but the 
salt remains. Again, trench a plot of sandy loam 2 feet deep, 
placing 6 inches of good farmyard manure in the bottom, plant 
this ground with Cabbage, and the result will be slow growth, 
small leaves of a pale green colour, tough in texture, and few of 
the plants will form hearts. 
These examples of practice are from the book of experience, 
and if the caching of Mr. Bishop does not coincide with them it 
will be for him to explain the reason why. When doing this 
perhaps he will kindly mention his authority for the statement 
that a molecule of water vapour will hold (by affinity) mineral 
substances ? Gaseous compounds of something like the same 
specific gravity may mingle with water vapour ; but how mineral 
elements, at ordinary temperatures, are to be made do so will 
be for your learned correspondent to tell your readers.—R. C. H. 
A WHITE WATSONIA. 
A CORRESPONDENT sends flowers of Watsonia iridifolia var. O’Brieni 
which remind us that this charming Irid is not so extensively grown as 
it should be. Several varieties have been known in English gardens for 
the greater portion of the present century, and W. iridifolia var. fulgens 
is a brilliant companion for the beautiful W. rosea ; but the variety now 
depicted (fig. 31) is not generally known. Like the rest it is of easy 
culture and may be grown in pots for greenhouse decoration. 
CAMPANULA G. F. WILSON. 
It is well recognised that the nomenclature of the dwarf 
Campanulas is in a very confused condition, and that the task of 
clearing up doubtful points is by no means an easy one. The 
hybrid Campanulas bearing this name have given rise to consider¬ 
able private correspondence, besides what has taken place through 
the medium of the horticultural press. I say Campanulas 
advisedly, because there are at least two, and there are probably 
more all entitled to the name. It is unfortunate that this is so, 
but until this is recognised the confusion will continue, to the 
bewilderment of growers. Considerable inquiry has placed me in 
possession of some information regarding the plant or plants which 
may be worthy of record, and may tend to disperse some of the 
difficulty which has arisen. 
Several years ago a number of seedlings were raised by the late 
Mr. Anderson Henry of Hay Lodge, near Edinburgh. These were 
tbe result of a cross between C. pulla and C. turbinata. The 
seedlings varied in habit, and it is through this that the confusion 
has arisen, the same name having been given to the various forms. 
Nor is this the only unfortunate circumstance connected with the 
matter, as the plants were first named by the raiser C. Regeli, 
next C. Balfouri, and then C. G. F. Wilson. I am not aware if 
Mr. Anderson Henry distributed any under the name of C. Regeli, 
but he seems to have sent some out as C. Balfouri, as I have seen 
his name in catalogues, and this summer I saw in the garden of 
he late Mr. Jenner of Easter Duddingston Lodge a plant of a 
yellow-leaved Campanula labelled C. Balfouri aurea, which is 
identical with one of the varieties of C. G. F. Wilson in the Edin¬ 
burgh Botanic Garden, and with the plant named C. G. F. Wilson 
at Kew. The Easter Duddingston plant is understood to have 
come direct from Mr. Anderson Henry’s garden. It is as C. G. F. 
Wilson, however, that these Campanulas have been generally dis¬ 
tributed, and it is to be hoped that this name may be retained, as 
although it was not the prior title it is in accordance with the now 
recognised piinciple of giving English names to plants of garden 
origin. 
From an inspection of plants grown as C. G. F. Wilson in th 
Botanic Gardens at Kew and Edinburgh, also in many private 
FIG. 31.—WATSONIA IRIDIFOLIA VAR. O’BRIENI. 
gardens, and from growing several plants from various sources 
close together in my own garden, I have come to the conclusion 
that they may be divided into two forms. One of these, which we 
may call No. 1, has leaves which are yellowish when they are in a 
young state, but afterwards become a healthy green. This form 
has deep blue flowers, with the centre almost white. These are 
neither erect nor drooping, but face to one side. The habit of 
this form is vigorous, and it grows from a few inches to 1 foot 
in height, and is one of the best of the dwarf Campanulas for 
garden purposes. On a recent visit to Kew I saw a small plant of 
this form labelled “ Campanula of garden origin,” or words of 
similar import. 
The other type, which we may call No. 2, has also leaves 
yellowish at first, and these are nearly always retained, although in 
some gardens, my own among the number, the foliage is much 
greener than in others. The flowers are very similar to those of 
the other type, but more sparingly produced, and are in some cases 
a little shorter than those of No. 1. The habit is much dwarfer 
and less vigorous, and the plant is more difficult to retain in the 
