4 GO 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
September 12. 
blue colour; they are produced from the axils of the leaves, 
in clusters or bunches upon long flower-stalks, making the 
plant altogether useful where nosegays arc in much request. 
It commences flowering about the first of July, and con¬ 
tinues growing and flowering until the end of September. 
So long as the plant continues to grow, so long it continues 
flowering ; and should it appear to grow too large it bears to 
be nipped in, or some portion of its side-shoots or tops 
shortened in so as to suit the situation, or prevent its over¬ 
shadowing other plants. It should be planted as a back or 
middle-row plant in the borders; and it will require to be 
supported by a strong stake and neat tie in due season of 
its growth. It is readily increased by root division in open 
weather during the spring months. At the same time, we 
may remark, that this good-natured plant might be planted 
at any season. 
Galega officinalis alba, is a white variety of the pre¬ 
ceding species, and is a plant equally desirable to possess. 
Indeed, I know of no two plants that are more desirable to 
have in a flower-garden as back or middle-row plants. 
They are of handsome growth, well clothed with neat pin¬ 
nated leaves, and produce a profusion of bloom for a great 
length of time. 
Galega outentalis, or Eastern Goat’s-Rue.—This is no¬ 
thing like such a handsome and desirable plant as the pre¬ 
viously noted species, though one likes to have it for the 
sake of variety, where plenty of room and a love of flowers 
prevail. Its blossoms are of a deep and pretty blue colour, 
produced in a spike-like form. Its leaves are larger than in 
the G. officinalis, and it is of a run-about habit at the root, 
particularly in light soils; therefore it requires to be 
oftener taken up, and replanted, in order to keep it in com¬ 
pact bunches. It is a native of the Levant, and was intro¬ 
duced to this country in the year 1801. 
CORONILLA. 
G'oronilla vaiua. —This, the hardy herbaceous Coronilla, 
also belongs to the natural order of leguminous plants, and 
a very desirable hardy border plant it is. It is a native of 
Europe, and was introduced to this country in the year 1507. 
Its flowers are produced in round heads upon rather long 
flower-stalks, very similar to the common Coronilla glauca of 
our greenhouses; but they are of a pale purple or pinkish 
colour. It is a very free-growing plant, and also a very free 
bloomer, continuing flowering for a longtime, from July to 
the end of September. It is of a spreading habit at the root, 
particularly in light, rich soils ; but of such run-about plants 
the suckers should Ire continually pulled up as they appear, 
unless a few should be required to give to a friend, or for 
increase. The main plant should be attended to in due 
time, as to sticking and early tying up, as it is of a 
decumbent habit, and when once its stems have been 
allowed to run about of its own accord for a time, and then 
comes to be tied up to a stake, the result is, the plant is 
then very much deformed, and seldom ever looks tidy all 
the season. When tied up in time, and again when it re¬ 
quires it, and the suckers kept clear away from it, this plant 
forms as neat and compact a bunch in the borders many 
years in the same spots without having any occasion to 
replant it; and rises from one-and-a-half to three feet in 
height, serving well as a second-row plant in the borders. 
If this plant is neglected it will soon run over a whole 
border, and have the whole to itself. A small bed of it 
would not look amiss, but quite the contrary; and I have 
seen it so. But where I have a selection of mixed hardy 
border plants, I like to see them in medium-sized bunches, 
and all partaking of an equal share of air and light. 
Therefore, to carry out this purpose, attention must be paid 
to early sticking, trimming, and keeping free from suckers 
and the like. T. W. 
POLAND versus HAMBURGH. 
An article from the pen of Mr. Brent, in The Cottage 
Gardenek of August 22nd, refers to the old subject of 
“ Poland versus Hamburgh.” The argument there em¬ 
ployed embraces several distinct points : in the first place, 
“Polands," and “bearded Polands,” which Mr. Brent 
would style Ilamburghs, are regarded as of distinct origin. 
This is, of course, opposed to the now general system of 
bringing all the regularly-tufted fowls into one class as 
“Polish” (a more correct designation, by the way, under 
any circumstance, than “Poland”). To justify the pro¬ 
posed alteration, it should, therefore, be required, that strong 
evidence of the individuality of the two species should be 
forthcoming. But Mr. Brent, in his recent paper, adds 
little to his former arguments against the present system. 
We strongly object, however, to his derivation of Poland, as 
a corruption of “ polled-hen; ” to “ poll,” being given in 
Johnson as equivalent “to cut off hair from the head,” 
“to clip short,” “ to shear; ” it is difficult, therefore, to con¬ 
ceive how such an epithet could ever have been applied to a 
fowl conspicuous by its exuberant topknot. 
Careful examination, and continued enquiry, reassure us 
of the correctness of the opinion, that the early history of 
the “ Polish ” fowl is most unsatisfactory, and that facts are 
altogether wanting to bear out the presumed distinction 
between the birds so-called, and those which Mr. Brent would 
term “ bearded Ilamburghs.” 
Uniformity, beyond all doubt, would be far too dearly 
purchased by the sacrifice of truth, or the misrepresentation 
of a single positive fact. When we have, therefore, urged 
the advantage of adherence to what has now become the 
generally-recognised system of nomenclature of nine-tenths 
of our Poultry Societies, numerically considered, and of 
nineteen-twentieths of them, if we regard their relative in¬ 
fluence and importance, it will be evident that any resig¬ 
nation of the principle of “ uniformity with all attainable 
accuracy ” was most remote from our intentions. 
But Mr. Brent has strong objections to the application of 
the term “ Hamburgh,” to the fowls commonly shown under 
that name. So far as the Pencilled birds are concerned, 
“ Hamburgh ” seems by no means an inappropriate name. 
For although Holland may now be the principal source 
from which our markets are supplied with them, the city 
whence their designation has been taken, was, in former 
days, the scene of many exportations. Whence they might 
have originally come there, we have no certain data on 
which to form an opinion ; they might, possibly, it is true, 
have been brought from Spain or Turkey ; but that, again, is 
a mere sui-mise, and an appellation on that ground would be 
liable to still graver objections than the one they now bear. 
But this suggests the consideration, that if we get rid of 
the name “Hamburgh" (we are speaking simply of the 
Pencilled birds), we must supply its place ; and is this to he 
effected in any way without still more exposing ourselves to 
this charge of inaccuracy? “Dutch Every-day-layers,” 
“Creoles,” “Prince Albert’s Fowls,” “Bolton Bays and 
Greys,” “ Chitteprats ’’—these are all synonymes; and will the 
use of any of them avoid the objections to which the term 
“ Hamburgh,” in this case, may be open; or will any new 
designation he more apt in this respect ? 
Let ns now pass to the Spangled birds. Here, indeed, 
little can be said as respects their geographical title to the 
term “ Hamburghs.” Whatever may have been their origin, 
for a long time past it is certain that they have ranked as 
peculiarly an English breed. But, even in this instance, it 
may be fairly asked, what good is likely to result from the 
adoption of any one of their various synonymes ? for even 
our opponents in this matter will hardly tolerate the appli¬ 
cation of more than one, if, at least, any definite classifi¬ 
cation be their object. “ Gold and Silver-pheasanted fowls,” 
“ Moonies,” “ Red-caps,” and “ Mop-fowls," are the prin¬ 
cipal synonymes in use; and is the substitution of any one of 
these likely to be favourably received, or to clear away 
existing confusion? We think not; and if it be objected, 
that at the best this is merely negative evidence for the 
continuan'ce of the term “ Hamburgh,” we reply, that the 
formation of the comb, the colour of the ear-lobe, as also 
of the legs, their properties a's non-sitters, with the common 
distinction of the two colours into which each race is sub¬ 
divided, point to the possession of common features, which, 
in the absence of a better-grounded designation, may, at 
least, tolerate the common name hitherto applied. Our 
opinion has been often expressed as to the entire absence 
of any “ relationship ” between the Pencilled and Spangled 
birds, so that our meaning can hardly he misunderstood. 
The synonymes we have just mentioned, are, in some in¬ 
stances, erroneously drawn; in others, they are mere pro- 
