368 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
October 18,1894. 
■because the prettily spotted flower clusters are more withiu easy reach 
and view. 
The finest specimen I have seen is at Lord Justice Lopes’ Wiltshire 
seat, Heywood, Westbury. I am unable to give any exact measure¬ 
ments, but I should estimate that the spread of branches would be at 
least 50 feet. It has been considered necessary to brace the principal 
branches with strong bands and chains as a protection against snow and 
wind storms, and the tree very naturally has a considerable value set 
on it by its owner, and which it quite deserves. The solitary tree at 
Rood Ashton, I am told, was reduced to about half its original size by 
the loss of a large branch a few years since, but a very good specimen 
still remains, and flowered very freely from the middle of August till 
past the second week in September. In the Victoria Park, Bath, too, 
Catalpas have been a feature, and there is not a doubt but that their 
ornamental character, as displayed in public parks, will lead to an 
extension in planting at the proper season in private gardens. 
The hot summer of last year, no doubt, contributed very largely to 
the fine display that has been general this season, but it does not follow 
that fiowering depends on such a summer for ripening the wood, because 
in our case the display of last year was equal to that of this one, and it 
is worthy the attention of planters for ornament, independent of its 
floral dispositions. It is a tree that anyone unacquainted with it will 
stay to inquire for its name, particularly during the growing season. 
It has an aspect quite its own, whether in foliage or a deciduous state, 
and is claimed to be a good town tree, an additional recommendation 
certainly deserving of recognition. All the trees known to me are 
growing in good loamy soil, well drained ; the one at Heywood during 
some structural alterations carried out at the house some years since had 
a deep layer of builder’s refuse put on the surface, probably over the 
whole space occupied by its roots, but in spite of this it is perfectly 
healthy, and a very fine specimen.—W. Stetjgnell. 
National Rose Society. 
We understand that this society has arranged to hold the annual 
meeting and dinner at Hotel Windsor on December 6th. The 
exhibitions in 1895 have also, it is said, been fixed as follows 
Southern show at Gloucester, June 26th ; metropolitan show at Crystal 
Palace, July 6th ; and northern show at Derby, July 17th. 
The Trophy Class—Fashion in Roses. 
In answer to my question as to whether he wishes the trophy class 
reduced to thirty-six or twenty-four, Mr. Grahame complains (page 338) 
that I am undecided, and that “ E. M.” and I will not say what we 
want. This seems unreasonable. We have not been agitating for a 
change ; he has. It is obvious that it is for him to state what he wants. 
Speaking for myself, I want nothing, which does not necessarily imply 
that I would grant nothing ; but there will probably be others with me 
in requesting Mr. Grahame to fill in the cheque before he asks us to 
sign it. _ 
In his second temperate letter (page 338) Mr. W. Paul brings no 
evidence in favour of the change of fashion in Roses, which he alleges to 
have taken place. It was not that he depreciated “ John ” or “ James,” 
but that he said fashion had changed from one to the other. It is 
rather diflScult, as I said before, to follow him in the four Rose forms 
that he mentions, as they do not correspond with those adopted by the 
National Rose Society. _ 
The “ expanded ” would probably mean what is generally known as 
“flat,” of which Souvenir de la Malmaison is a type. No doubt this was 
once fashionable, but I thought that at that time the imbricated and 
high-centred forms had not come into existence. 
The “cupped” form, again, is not satisfactorily defined. It would 
naturally, according to all analogy, mean a hollowed centre, of which 
examples would be found in Laslia, Anna do Diesbach, and Coupe 
d’H^b^. I find, however, that some look upon “ cupped ” as representing 
the outward form of the flower, and take the chalice-like outline in 
profile of Marie Verdier as a type. The example given by the National 
Rose Society, viz.. Baroness Rothschild, does not answer to either of 
these definitions. 
The “compact” is a term I do not remember to have met with other 
than in Mr. W. Paul’s writings. It seems applicable to those with short 
outer petals, generally incurved, such as Madame Bravy, Monsieur 
Furtado, and Comtesse de Chabrillant; but these appear to me to be 
more correctly the true “ globular ” forms, this term being often applied 
equally to flowers of different shapes. 
In his large work, “The Rose Garden,” Mr. Wm. Paul applies the 
term “expanded” to A. K, Williams and Le Havre; “cupped” to 
Beauty of Waltham, Madame Bravy, Madame Gabriel Luizet, Senateur 
Vaisse, and Victor Verdier; and “globular” to Niphetos. These 
examples, taken almost at random, show that his form ideals and 
standards are at all events different from those to which the National 
Rose Society has accustomed us.—W. R, Raillem. 
Retieement of the Rev. F. R. Buenside. 
Everyone who knows Mr. Burnside will be sorry to read this heading. 
Domestic reasons have made this great rosarian decide on removal from 
Birch Vicarage, Hereford, and with that change the necessity arises to 
give up the culture and exhibiting of his famous Tea Roses. What, 
however, is a general loss gives a rare opportunity to some few of us to 
obtain specimens of the finest Tea Rose plants I have ever seen, as 
Mr. Burnside intends immediately to disperse his celebrated collection. 
—C. J. G. 
[We eh are the regret expressed by our correspondent on Mr. Burnside’s 
retirement from the competitive arena. He is a master in the art of 
growing and showing Tea Roses. His blooms will be missed, but not, 
we hope, his presence, from the leading tournaments.] 
Mr. Mawley’s Rose Analysis. 
Everyone is interested in reading anything on Roses which comes 
from Mr. Mawley’s pen, and his report on and analysis of the most 
recent meeting at the Crystal Palace of the National Rose Society held 
last July, will, as u sual, attract general attention. It is well to bear in 
mind that this anal ysis only professes to be of certain Roses shown at a 
particular meeting this year, and at similar meetings held in previous 
years in or about the first week of July at the Crystal Palace and South 
Kensington by the N.R.S. since 1886—if this be not remembered a casual 
reader might think that the analysis (on which, I understand, an immense 
deal of labour is bestowed) was one which represented the general 
position of exhibition Roses during the past eight or nine years, whereas 
it is really the position Mr. Mawley considers certain Roses in winning 
boxes to merit by their achievements at the Crystal Palace and similar 
metropolitan meetings of the National Rose Society. 
But to pass from the analytical to the more practical part 
of the article, which is acquired from knowledge open to all of us, 
everyone will agree with what is said about the past year—a miserable 
one from a horticultural and agricultural point of view. I notice two 
Roses in the analysis which I think are worth a passing comment. 
Mr. Mawley states that Victor Hugo has been more frequently staged than 
usual, and being a most brilliant Rose I am pleased that so many found 
it as valuable at the Crystal Palace this year as I have at all times, 
although in an opinion obtained by me this year from eighteen of the 
greatest rosarians in England, of the best twenty-five H.P. Roses, Victor 
Hugo did not appear in the first twenty-five in that list, I have found 
it one of the truest of perpetuals, as it also is one of the loveliest of the 
red Roses. Mr. Mawley does not mention Xavier Olibo, which has been 
unusually good, and shown at many Rose meetings in 1894. Mr. 
Lindsell won the N.R.S. medal with a fine specimen at Halifax. I am 
glad to see a tribute paid to the merit of Margaret Dickson, a lovely 
flower, over which much disappointment had been hitherto experienced 
by English growers, although its raisers have managed to show it 
superbly every year. While defending the N.R.S. Committee for their 
new section of Hybrid Teas, Mr. Mawley rather follows in the footsteps 
of your correspondent Mr. W. Paul, who originated the correspondence 
on “New Fashion in Roses;” and Mr. Mawley says that in respect to 
freedom of flowering the new section of H.T.’8 stands out distinct 
“from all the so-called Perpetuals.” Might I ask whether, in this 
general condemnation of Hybrid Perpetuals, A. K. Williams, Charles 
Lefebvre, Victor Hugo, and Susanne Rodocanachi are included ? If so, 
I am not in agreement with the writer, and I would place Viscountess 
Folkestone as equal to La France and superior to the other H.T.s he 
selects for the special advantage he mentions. 
To show one of the difficulties of an analysis of the kind under 
criticism, which only refers to the exhibits of one meeting, I will 
instance the reference made by Mr. Mawley to Cleopatra. As a matter 
of fact, and general knowledge, that Rose was certainly up to early in 
July the Tea Rose of the season, and at several meetings it was 
superbly exhibited ; and in support of this statement I would especially 
instance the Roses staged by Mr. Benj. Cant at the Colchester meeting, 
and by Mr. Burnside at Windsor, which gained N.R.S. medals for those 
gentlemen; but at many other places this Rose was shown in superb 
form this year, and made a distinct advance in position. 
Madame Isaac Pereire should be so spelt, and not Peri^re. In 
connection with this question of spelling foreign named Roses, and 
also their pronunciation, I purpose shortly to send you a communication. 
—Charles J. Grahame. 
Anything in the shape of analysis of the doings of a popular flower 
like our national emblem must prove interesting to many, other than 
rosarians and Rose lovers. In common, then, with many others I desire 
to thank “ E. M.” and his helpers for their labours, collected and given 
to us in last week’s issue. But, interesting as it must prove, I have 
always considered this form a misleading guide to the beginner as to the 
best Roses. Our seasons are of such varied character, and certain Roses 
unmistakeably prefer particular seasons, and so appear in higher or 
lower positions according as they have enjoyed their peculiar season or 
the reverse. It may be said that striking the average destroys much of 
this, and so it does when the Roses have appeared in every list, hut it 
