October 25, 1894. 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
379 
Limited, or some other kindred swindle, dear to a confiding 
investor’s heart—and to his pocket. 
We English are an imitative people, and might probably have 
followed the Dutch fashion had not the quarrel which broke out 
between Charles I. and his Parliament, and the civil war which 
followed, filled men’s minds with sterner thoughts than the growth 
of and traffic in Tulips. 
These troubles, and the revolutionary change* which followed, 
having passed away. Tulip growing, along with other peaceful 
pursuits, began to revive, for we find in ‘‘ The Tatler ” of August 
31st, 1710, an amusing paper written by Steele, ridiculing the 
magnificent names given by florists to their Tulips, many of which 
he enumerates as “ Alexander the Great,” the “ Black Prince,” the 
“ Duke of Marlborough,” and others. Such names are common among 
Tulips even now, and Steele, if he could revisit us, would find in 
such names as “ King of the Universe ” and “ Queen of England ” 
plenty of material for the exercise of his power of witty ridicule. 
High prices were evidently given for Tulips at the time Steele 
wrote, for he makes his Tulip grower say that he valued bis bed, 
which was not more than 20 yards in length, more than the best 
100 acres of land in England, and that his cook had nearly ruined 
him by boiling, in mistake for Onions, a handful of Tulip roots, 
which had C03t him £1000. 
There is every reason to believe that from the period when the 
fondness for the Tulip revived in this country, until the middle of 
the eighteenth century, it was a considerable favourite in the 
gardens of the wealthy and the tasteful ; but from 1750 other 
plants, chiefly American, began to come into fashion, and the 
Tulip gradually disappeared from the gardens of the upper, and 
their imitators in the middle classes. Still to the Tulips were left 
loving servants, who worked quietly and faithfully. No matter 
for how long the general public has neglected the flower. Tulip 
growers have up to the present never been wanting. 
Until the beginning of this century, the most esteemed Tulips 
were of Dutch or Flemish origin, but English growers were at 
work raising seedlings as early as 1740, as is apparent from Philip 
Miller’s “Gardeners’ Dictionary,” published 1747. Under the 
heading “ Tulipa,” amongst other very interesting reading, occurs 
the following :— 
“ The late-blowing Tulips are so numerous that it would be to no 
purpose to attempt to make a catalogue of them. These are generally 
obtained from breeders, which is a term applied to all such flowers as 
are produced from seeds which are of one self colour, and have good 
bottoms and chives. These do, in time, break into various beautiful 
stripes according to the ground of their former self colour. Of these 
breeders there hath been a great variety brought into England from 
Flanders of late years ; but there are some curious persons who have 
lately obtained many valuable breeders from seeds sown in England, 
and doubtless were we as industrious to sow the seeds of these flowers as 
the people of France and Flanders, we might in a few years have as 
great a variety as is to be found in any part of Europe.” 
Miller, unfortunately, does not give us the names of the 
“ curious persons ” be refers to. In James Maddock’s “ Florists’ 
Directory,” of which I have an edition, published in 1810, full 
directions are given for raising seedlings, and on plate 3 is a 
portrait of a Tulip, which for form and marking would pass 
muster very well at the present day. Maddock, however, gives no 
list either of the names or of the raisers of Tulips, but when we 
come to refer to Thomas Hogg’s “ Treatise on the Growth and 
Culture of the Carnation, Pink, Auricula, Polyanthus, Ranunculus 
Tulip, &c.,” published 1822, we find the following interesting 
remarks on seedling-raising :— 
“ The fresh spirit that has been infused into the cultivators of flowers 
since our return to peace and to peaceful pursuits has induced many to 
try to raise a fresh set of breeders, and to sow seed annually that has 
been saved from fine flowers. The enthusiastic florist overlooks every 
difficulty ; eager with hope, and ardent in the pursuit he anticipates 
success, and his perseverance effects it. The most gratifying and 
complete success has attended the labours of Mr. Carter of Foxgrove, 
Wilts, of a Mr. Austen, a Mr. Strong, a Mr. Lawrence, and a Mr. 
Goldham, who have raised from seed and matured and broke into colour 
perhaps some of the finest Tulips in the country. Mr. Clarke of 
Croydon, a scientific and experienced florist, has the best breeders in 
the country, raised from the seed of Louis, Charbonnier, Davey’s 
Trafalgar, &c., with finely formed cups and clear bottoms ; they are 
in very high repute among florists.” 
With these men, who may be called the fathers of the English 
Tulip, began our independence. Up to that time all the best 
Tulips came from the Continent, but ever since we have continued 
to improve the flower, and now Holland is not resorted to for 
supplies, except as one might visit for curiosity a museum of 
antiquities, for the Dutchmen still continue to grow the “ shabby, 
foul, and misshapen ” kinds that our grandfathers were glad to 
banish from their collections. Tulip growers were now at work 
all over the country ; and in the midlands, Lancashire, Yorkshire, 
Northumberland, and in Scotland the flower was grown, shows held, 
seedlings raised, and much enthusiasm displayed. In those days, 
however, communication was costly and infrequent, and the con¬ 
sequence was that different districts formed different ideas as to 
what constituted perfection in the florist Tulip. 
The London growers, who deemed themselves the aristocrats 
of the cult, thought the chief requisites in a Tulip were shortness 
of cup and perfect purity of base and stamens. Any Tulip possess¬ 
ing these properties was considered fine, even if the marking of 
the petals was uneven, broken, or defective. 
The Midland and North of England growers considered correct 
marking the vital property of the Tulip, and according to them a 
FIG. 58.— CYCAS KEVOLUTA FLOWERING. 
correctly marked Tulip was fine even if the shape was bad and the 
base was foul. 
I cannot make out what was the Scotch standard. From reports 
of their shows it would seem that they leaned rather to the London 
ideas as to marking, but they evidently did not insist on the purity 
that the London men considered essential. 
The floricultural publications published from 1830 to 1860 
contain much controversy about the properties of a fine Tulip. 
Mr. George Glenny was one of the first to lay down a standard, 
about the year 1832. Mr. Groom, Mr. Slater, and others, more 
or less famous, gave their ideas on the subject, but it was reserved 
for Dr. Hardy of Warrington to settle the matter, which he did 
effectually by writing two luminous articles to the “ Midland 
Florist” in 1847 on the form of the Tulip, and anoiher in 1855 on 
marking and the other properties neceisary for a fine flower. 
The southern growers, amongst whom may be named Mr. 
Groom of Clapham, Sanders of Staines, Macefield of Hoxton, 
Betteridge of Abingdon, Lawrence of Hampton, Goldham of 
Sydenham, and Norman of Woolwich, kept up the reputation of 
being the best growers and seedling raisers until about 1845, but 
after that time seedlings of great merit were produced in ever- 
increasing numbers in the north and the midlands, and most of 
the famous southern flowers were in a comparatively short time 
superseded by the productions of such raisers as Gibbons of 
