584 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
December 27, 1894. 
Two New Incurved Chrysanthemums—Mrs. E. C. Kingston 
AND Mrs. Jno. Gardiner. 
The above named varieties are grand additions to our incurved 
section, and unless I am much mistaken both will figure very promi¬ 
nently in the winning stands of 1895. 
Mrs. K. C. Kingston has only been exhibited at four different places 
—viz., at Philadelphia, U.S.A., in November, 1893, where it was 
specially mentioned; and this year at the National Chrysanthemum 
Society’s show at the Aquarium show, also at York and Beverley, at 
each place gaining the highest possible award for a new variety. Its 
flowers are large, of an excellent form, and a beautiful shell-pink in 
colour, with broad florets. 
Mrs. Jno. Gardiner, wherever it has been exhibited, has gained hosts 
of admirers. Both colour and form are truly grand, and it should take 
front rank at once as one of the best front-row blooms ever introduced. 
From what I hear Owen’s New Crimson will create quite a sensation 
next autumn.— Yorkshire Bite. 
A Large Show Chrysanthemum. 
Last year when on a visit to Mr. Owen I noticed a very fine large 
Japanese flower called Mme. Eozain. Having been recently to Maiden¬ 
head I was particularly struck with this variety again, and on looking 
over the show reports do not find that it has been staged in any of the 
winning exhibits at the shows. It is difficult to imagine that such a 
flower has been entirely overlooked, but perhaps there may be faults of 
growth with which I am not acquainted, and which would account for 
its not being shown. Mme. Eozain was raised by M. Eozain, Bou- 
charlet, and sent out by him in 1893 ; in build it is rather flat but of 
very great breadth, and has florets of immense length. They are tubular, 
twisted, and intermingling. The colour is silver pink edged purple, and 
if known might, other things being equal, prove to be a valuable exhibi¬ 
tion flower. 
French Chrysanthemums at the Eecent Exhibitions. 
A rough audit of the varieties staged in the winning stands at the 
various leading shows recently reported in the Journal of Horticulture 
gives the following varieties as figuring in them. Mrs. C. Harman Payne, 
Mdlle. Thbr^se Eey, Viviand Morel, Mdlle. Marie Hoste, President 
Borel, Etoile de Lyon, Pr^fet Eobert, Louise, Madame J. Beylie, 
M. Pankoucke, Marquise de Paris, Madame Isaac, Madame C. Molin, 
Alberic Lunden, Madame C. Capitant, Souvenir de Petite Amie, Madame 
Oct. Mirbeau, Incendie, Madame Carnot, Commandant Blusset, Madame 
Ad. Chatain, Madame A. Giroud, Madame Calvat, M. Bernard, 
H. Jacotot fils, Beautb Toulousaine, M. E. A. Carri^re, Val d’Andorre, 
Boule d'Or, Condor, Madame Eicoud, Van der Heede, Le Verseau, and 
Vice-President Audiguier. Some of our friends about two years ago 
began to prophesy that the French raisers were “ played out.” It does 
not look like it yet.—P. 
The Missing Link. 
J. Agate, the variety that is the source of the coining of the above 
heading, affords a striking instance of the folly of judging a variety 
before it has been sufficiently cultivated and tested as to its proper 
development. It is well known to practical cultivators that seedling 
Chrysanthemums require considerable time and patience, as well as 
cultural skill, before a strict definition of their true character and class 
can be written. No doubt many of the best and most popular varieties 
were but single-flowered the first time they expanded their blooms. In 
some instances three years are required to thoroughly test the capa¬ 
bilities of a variety. Instances occur to my mind where varieties have 
been unfavourably spoken of that have afterwards developed into 
exceptionally fine examples. C. B. Whitnall was condemned as a bad 
Japanese when it opened its first blooms. He would indeed he a bold 
man who placed it otherwise than in the front rank as a true incurved 
flower. Not only does this variety possess alt the points of a perfect 
incurved bloom, but its colour is quite unique—a soft velvety maroon. 
In the case of J. Agate, a variety which is supposed by some to 
furnish the “ missing link,” experts and specialists were misled when the 
first blooms developed. As then seen it was truly a Japanese in form, 
but a bad type of that section. I remarked at the time to Mr. J, Agate 
what a poor variety it appeared to be to bear the name of so popular a 
cultivator. Never was the truth of the old adage, “ time changeth all 
things,” better exemplified than in the case of this Chrysanthemum, 
which is at the present time engaging the attention of so many judges, 
critics, and readers of the Journal of Horticulture. 
From blooms developed here this season, I have no hesitation 
whatever in placing J. Agate amongst incurved varieties. I cannot see 
how the Floral Committee of the National Chrysanthemum Society 
could do otherwise than grant a certificate to this Chrysanthemum 
placed before them in the condition that it was on November 7th. The 
action of the Committee referred to should clear any doubt as to which 
class it belongs. However, I do not know how the supplemental 
catalogue issued by the governing body classifies this variety, not having 
seen a copy. 
In description J. Agate compares favourably with any in the 
incurved section. Well developed blooms are perfect in “ build,”' 
the florets not quite so round at the tips as a typical ” Queen” bloom, 
being rather more pointed than in the case of Empress of India, which 
it is supposed to closely resemble. The colour is pure white, as was the 
case when first brought out as a Japanese. The alteration is in the 
” build ” and form of the blooms. 
I think few persons of experience will agree with “A. D.” as te 
placing Lord Brooke and Eobert Owen in the same section as Mons. 
E. Bahuant and J. Agate. It does not require a very close inspection 
with a practised eye to detect the ample lines of distinction in the two 
sections.—E. Molyneux, Swanmore. 
REMOVING BARK FROM VINES. 
The article on ” Cleaning Vines,” by Mr. J. J. Craven (page 534) will 
probably cause a little comment by some readers of the Journal of 
Horticulture, and in some instances may raise their ire as well, for 
surely no gardener who values bis position, or studies the interests of 
his employer, would think of entrusting the cleaning of Vines, or any¬ 
thing else, to careless or inexperienced men. Your correspondent also 
states that in ” his opinion ” such treatment (the removal of bark) 
impairs the constitution of the Vine. Does it ? How, and in what 
way ? Surely Vines grown under glass do not need superfluous bark 
left on them, to say nothing of the harbour it affords for insect pests. 
As a practical gardener 1 quite fail to see how an abundance of bark 
can ” indicate ” there is something ” good ” to follow. 
The argument that “ Nature never provided bark to be peeled off 
annually ” does not necessarily imply that it is injurious to remove it. 
If everything that Nature provided were left alone, our vocations as 
gardeners would soon cease. The writer also states that he should be 
reluctant to strip Vines infested with mealy bug, but “ thinks ” several 
thorough washings would be his method. It may be that he has never 
had the misfortune to “ take over ” Vines infested with mealy bug, 
and have not had the experience. Prevention is better than cure, and I 
am of opinion that skilful winter cleaning is far better than allowing 
the pests to increase, to the annoyance of both head gardener and hi* 
subordinates.— Erica. 
THE FORM OF MINIATURE VIOLAS. 
After reading your notes on “Violas and their Friends” (page 543) 
I have gone through the oflScial report of the Viola Conference, which 
has left me in a difficulty. Mr. Steel’s paper on the Miniature 
Viola gives the ideal properties. In speaking of form he says, “The 
flowers may not be circular, as in the florist’s Pansy, but may be narrow 
and more oval in shape.” The Conference also passed a resolution to 
the effect that all flowers of the miniature type must not exceed 1J inch 
in diameter. Here comes the diflficulty. How do we find the diameter of 
an oval flower ? I believe the word diameter means a line passing 
through a circle dividing it into two equal parts. Now are we to under¬ 
stand that Mr. Steel’s form stands for nothing, and only circular blooms 
to be recognised, or what? Perhaps some of our Conference friends will 
explain to— One in a Difficulty. 
[No doubt “ diameter means a line passing through a circle,” but 
does it not also mean the measure across the centre of an object frona 
side to side? The doubt at issue is, however, relegated to the Viola 
growers.] 
AN IMPERISHABLE LABEL. 
I have enclosed an imperishable label, which (if you think it 
worth your notice) I have thought might be useful to some readers of 
the Journal. I find it very useful for the herbaceous border and 
Daffodils. The materials being nearly the colour of the soil makes it 
inconspicuous (no small matter in private gardens), and moreover it is 
improved by exposure ; the soil drying in the letters makes them more 
legible. 
I think it may be termed an inexpensive label too, as the materials 
are usually plentiful about most establishments—viz.. No. 13 galvanised 
wire, or that generally used for trellising walls ; and ordinary sheet 
lead, a square foot of which will cut nearly 100 of the enclosed size. 
I have tried strips of lead pointed like the wood label, but find they 
are too pliable when accidentally knocked by the foot or garden tool, 
whereas with the wire support they spring back into position again 
when so touched, and about one-third of the lead will suffice. I press 
the wire into the soil, quite up to the label. I know there is nothing 
new in lead labels for suspending, but I have nowhere seen them used 
for the border.—J. W. S., Yeldersley. 
[The labels sent consist of tablets of lead 2 inches long, three- 
quarters of an inch wide, and a little more than one-sixteenth of an 
inch thick, The top of the wire support is bent as a S hook, by which 
the tablet is fixed, and the hook pressed close. It could only be 
“ knocked ” off by persistent effort. The durability of the label is 
beyond dispute, the names of the plants being represented in bold letters 
deeply punched in. The labels must of necessity be inconspicuous, 
but we should imagine that keen eyes or close stooping would be 
necessary for reading them when close to the ground. We note the 
