August 15.] 
sitory,” but which is certainly not particularly entitled 
to be considered as a dwarf plant. No varieties of D. 
frustranea are given in the Hortus Kewensis. 
Mons. de Candolle, in his essay on the genus, has 
observed, that it is not probable we shall ever see a 
blue one, since the variation is from purple to yellow. 
He considers blue and yellow to be the fundamental 
types of the colours of flowers, and that they mutually 
exclude each other: yellows pass readily into red or 
white, but never into blue; and, in like manner, blue 
flowers are changed by cultivation into red and white, 
but never into yellow. Until about forty years ago, no 
variety was known that did not possess a tiuge of purple 
in its blossoms, and it was even doubted whether a blos¬ 
som entirely untinged with purple could be produced. 
When Mr. Sabine wrote on the dahlia in 1818, the 
single varieties only were abundant; the number of 
double ones was very limited, but they rapidly in¬ 
creased, and have now nearly expelled the single ones 
from gardens of repute. The extension of sorts has, 
however, been limited to the D. superflua; the varieties 
of D. frustranea have but little multiplied, and no 
double flowers of that species have yet been produced. 
The brilliancy of the colours of the blossoms of the D. 
frustranea, however, is such, that it might have been 
expected it would have induced some practical horticul¬ 
turist to apply his skill to their improvement. 
A few of the double dahlias which were raised at an 
early period still hold a place in the estimation of gar¬ 
deners ; but, in general, those of a few years’ standing 
have yielded their places to a younger progeny, which 
in their turn may be deprived of their station by fresh 
productions. 
After 1814, the dahlia was introduced to more gene¬ 
ral notice, and cultivated in most collections; but it 
was reserved for the intelligent cultivators of the last 
few years to circulate it more extensively, and make the 
most rapid advances towards a state of perfection. In¬ 
deed, so lately as less than twenty years since it was 
considered a perfectly novel sight to witness dahlias 
with double flowers in the garden of a tradesman or 
cottager; but, owing to the astonishing rapidity with 
which new and good sorts have since been obtained and 
circulated, it is now quite as rarely that we see or meet 
with a cottager’s garden which does not contain at least 
a few good dahlias; and many possess plants of first-rate 
sorts. ( Paxton on the Dahlia, 9.) 
In taking a retrospective view of the dahlia fancy, 
it is pleasing to remark the gradual improvement of 
this autumnal favourite up to the present time. This 
improvement is annually progressing towards greater 
perfection; for of late years many of the finest varie¬ 
ties have been introduced ; and it is notorious, that an 
established fine seedling at the present time will com¬ 
mand a higher price than at any previous period. To 
mark the progress of the dahlia, the stand that obtained 
the .£20 prize for the best twenty-four blooms at the 
Cambridge Dahlia Show in 1840, contained only one 
variety that was shown in the first stand of the same 
number of blooms at the Metropolitan Exhibition of 
299 
1846, a brief period of six years. That variety was 
Springfield Rival, a flower of 13 or 14 years’ standing. 
Both stands were grown by Mr. Turner. The former 
was considered to be the best that has been produced 
up to that time, and the latter was certainly the best 
twenty-four he had shown during 1846. At Cambridge, 
Unique was what is termed the “ bloom of the exhibi¬ 
tion;” Penelope, Amato, Hope, Conservative, Maid of 
Bath, and many other flowers now out of date, were 
stars in that superior stand. 
The first intelligent writer upon the characteristics of 
excellence in the Dahlia, we think, was Mr. Paxton, 
followed by Mr. Glenny and Mr. Wildmau; but as Mr. 
Glenny’s code in his Properties of Flowers is much 
fuller than Mr. Paxton’s, and was prior to Mr. Wild- 
man's, we shall adopt it with but slight alterations and 
additions:— 
1. Form. —Viewed in front, the flotver should be a perfect 
circle; the petals broad at the ends, smooth at the edges, 
thick and stiff in substance, perfectly free from indenture or 
point, and should cup a little, but not enough to shew the 
under surface. They should be in regular rows, each row 
forming a perfect circle, without any vacancy between them ; 
and all in the circle should be the same size, uniformly 
opened to the same shape, and not rubbed nor crumpled. 
2. Looked at sideways, the flower should form two-thirds 
of a ball. The rows of petals should rise one above another 
in rows; every petal should cover the join of the two petals 
under it—which the florists call imbricating—by this means 
the circular appearance is perfected throughout. 
3. The centre should be perfect; the unbloomed petals 
lying with their points towards the centre should form a 
button, and should be the highest part of the flower com¬ 
pleting the ball. 
4. The flower should be very double. The rows of petals 
lying one above another should cover one another very 
nearly; not more should be seen in depth than half the 
breadth; the more they are covered, so as to leave them 
distinct, the better in that respect; the petals, therefore, 
though cupped must be shallow. 
5. Size. —The size of the flower when well grown should 
be not less than four inches in diameter. 
6. Colour. —The colour should be dense, whatever it may 
be—not as if it were a white dipped in colour, but as if the 
whole flower was coloured throughout. Whether tipped or 
edged, it must be free from splashes or blotches, or in¬ 
definite marks of any kind ; and new flowers, unless they beat 
all old ones of the same colour, or are of a novel colour 
themselves, with a majority of the qioints of excellence, 
should be rejected. 
Defects.- —If the petals show the under side too much, 
even when looked at sideways,—if they do not cover each 
other well,—if the centre is composed of petals pointing 
upwards, or those which are round the centre are confused,— 
if the petals are too narrow, or exhibit too much of their 
length,—or if they show any of the green scale at the bottom 
of the petals,—if the eye is sunk,—if the shoulder is too high, 
the face flat, or the sides too upright,—if the petals show an 
indenture as if heart-shaped,—if the petals are too large and 
coarse, or are flimsy, or do not hold their form—in any or 
all these cases the flowers are objectionable ; and if there be 
one or two of these faults conspicuous, the flower is second 
or third-rate. 
If flowers are exhibited which show the disc, or a green 
scale, or have been eaten by vermin, or damaged by car¬ 
riage, or are evidently decayed, the censors should reject 
them at once. 
Characteristics of the Plant .—Although the form of the 
plant is quite of secondary consideration, and is only to be 
regarded as subservient to the more important consideration 
of exhibiting the flowers to more advantage as they grow, 
yet it is a matter worthy of some notice. Mr. Paxton’s 
observations upon it are very judicious. He says, the gene¬ 
ral figure should be uniform aud compact, that is, it should 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
