168 
THE GARDENING WORLD. 
November 13, 1886. 
WHITE DAFFODILS. 
What is the true Narcissus cernuus tortuosus ? I 
have been reading in a contemporary a multitudinous 
correspondence for the last month relative to white 
Daffodils, and in particular as to what constitutes the 
true Narcissus tortuosus of Spain. The fault to be 
found with one of the most prominent writers on the 
subject is that he studies Haworth rather too much ; 
whether as a classical scholar or not makes little matter ; 
hut, to do him justice, when he finds a pigeon-hole 
vacant that he cannot put a bird of Haworth into, he 
then does justice to ancient John Parkinson. Before 
I venture further with this subject, let me ask the 
readers of all garden literature, and also the good 
botanists of the present generation, have they yet 
fallen in with two white Daffodils answering to the 
description of what Parkinson describes as ‘ ‘ Pseudo- 
hispanieus flore albo major ” and “ Maximus albidus ? ” 
Parkinson describes the foliage—viz., of a whity 
green colour, yet not so white as in the lesser Spanish 
white kinds, and the height given as fixed (not 
characterised) at about 2 ft. If it be conceded that 
Parkinson saw with his eyes two living plants of 
this description as to foliage, I fail to recognise such, 
either in the type tortuosus or albicans, pinning those 
who differ from me to the foliage as described. 
Does Haworth mention Princeps, Minnie Warren, 
Golden Princeps (shall I say Rip Van Winkle or Leda), 
and, lastly, Ard-Rigli ? As to Leda, I do not believe 
he ever saw the plant—as known to me. If he ever 
saw it he would have ventured still further into the 
country of the lost tribes, and have been more wise in 
his generation. Why ? Because Leda and two other 
forms of it, gone to sleep at Temple Hill, exactly fit 
Parkinson’s plants in foliage, and when you take them 
from the soil in July the bulbs are white on the outside 
(with a whitish coate), as Parkinson describes. While 
the tortuosus of English gardens does not at all grow 
to the same height—not more than 14 ins.—and the 
foliage is blue-green, and the bulb brown-skinned, the 
difference in this respect being as distinct as what you 
could observe in the skin of Onions. No doubt but 
tortuosus has got the same peculiar Oak timber-like 
aroma. If Haworth had any knowledge of Ireland— 
and more particularly of its Daffodils—he never could 
have used the term spurius in connection with such a 
fine thing as Ard-Righ ; and if he were more conversant 
in “stage-coach times” with the secluded haunts of 
“old England,” I think we should have had more of 
the “light of other days” in Daffodils, and most 
certainly less of the foster parents “over the garden 
wall ” of the present day. Secundum artem. — TV. Baylor 
Hartland, Temple Hill, Cork. 
[Up to the present time there has been found on the 
Pyrenees but one white Narcissus, and that was 
discovered by Mr. Buxton a few years back, while on a 
hunting expedition. It has not yet been long enough 
in cultivation to allow of a decided opinion being given 
upon it, but, judging from Haworth, so far the small¬ 
ness of the flowers would lead to the assumption, that 
it may be N. moschatus, the lesser White Spanish 
Daffodil, notwithstanding that, the Kew authorities are 
of opinion that it is N. cernuus. Until someone 
discovers other forms of the white Spanish Daffodil, 
we must accept Herbert’s suspicion that “ these were 
artificial breeds which some cultivator had imposed 
upon the public as mountain plants above two centuries 
ago,” ( Bot. Reg., 1,843, t. 38). From the foregoing, 
the question arises, have we any descriptions from 
modern authors that will enable us to fix the character 
of the four white Daffodils, namely, albicans, tortuosus, 
cernuus and moschatus. Haworth and Herbert give 
detailed descriptions, and there is but one way of 
settling the question, and' that is, to have the plants 
grown on neutral ground—at Chiswick for instance— 
so that the Daffodil Committee can decide the question 
once for all upon the materials before them. Thequestion 
is a very interesting one, as Haworth and Herbert, and, 
we fancy Parkinson, and, perhaps, Salisbury are at one 
as to the number of white forms. As to identifying 
Daffodils by their foliage, we must say that it is not a 
safe proceeding, as it is so much influenced by climate 
and other circumstances—the height in particular 
depending upon the surroundings and other local con¬ 
ditions. A moist climate will give a tall plant, and a 
dry climate a dwarfer one; and to arrive at anything like 
a satisfactory conclusion, the plants should certainly be 
grown for two seasons on the same soil. Parkinson’s 
Pseudo hispanicus flore albo major is probably what 
is now recognised in gardens as albicans, but as to 
what N. maximus albidus may be, we cannot say. It 
may, however, perhaps, be matched in any trials that 
may take place. At present we cannot call to mind any 
one Daffodil that fits Parkinson’s description, but might 
it not be Bishop Mann ? Haworth certainly describes 
N. spurius, but we do -not suppose he knew what we 
now call Yellow King. As to N. princeps it may be 
stated that Haworth does not mention it, but Herbert 
does ; and as regards Leda, if that is what some growers 
maintain it to be, namely N. tortuosus, Haworth 
certainly had seen it, but not if it is something 
else. It should be remembered that Haworth had no 
popular names, so that what is now called Minnie 
Warren, in all probability was unknown to him. 
Golden Princeps would come under the shield of N. 
Telemonius, while Rip Van Winkle is probably none 
other than Haworth’s N. nanus flore plenus.—E d.] 
-->I<~- 
CHRYSANTEMUMS ROUND 
LIVERPOOL.— II. 
The usual exclamation is, “ My flowers are suffering 
terribly from damp but anyone visiting Mr. W. Mease 
will heartily sympathise with him, for the damp has 
been most destructive in his collection. It is not 
individual flowers that have suffered, but we are 
informed that in one night the whole of the flowers on 
one side of the greenhouse went; two or three nights 
afterwards nearly all in one of the vineries met with a 
like fate, and in another house they have escaped alto¬ 
gether. We were pleased to note Bronze Queen of 
England in good form ; these are the only satisfactory 
flowers we have seen of this variety, in most cases the 
blooms being very large but rough. Possibly care must 
be exercised in the selection of the bud. W. Robinson 
was also in good form, and amongst older varieties, 
Yellow Dragon, Mr. Bunn, Cherub, and Jardin des 
Plantes were good. As usual, the visitor to Wyncote 
always sees something worthy of note, and at present 
there is a grand spike of Vanda ccerulea in full beauty. 
Cattleya aurea, a splendid variety, and Cypripedium 
insigne Chantinii were also in flower. 
Mr. A. R. Cox, gardener to W. H. Watts, Esq., 
Elm Hall, Wavertree, is in strong form, as probably 
will be proved ere this is in print. Nil Desperandum, 
Boule d’Or, Triomphe de la Rue des Chalets, Lord 
Wolseley, Queen of England, and many others, are 
fine, deep, solid blooms. A beautiful variety of 
Cattleya superba splendens, very rich in colour, is in 
flower here also. 
At Childwell Hall 'a' very valuable sport from Meg 
Merrilies has been secured by Mr. T. Winckworth, 
gardener to Ralph Brocklebank, Esq. The colour is a 
pleasing yellow, similar to Peter the Great, and, 
without doubt, it will prove an acquisition as an exhi¬ 
bition flower. It appears to resist the damp more than 
the general collection. Mr. Winckworth has also been 
experimenting in reducing the height of one of the 
tallest growers, Madame C. Audiguier. He has grafted 
it on Miss Margaret, but Madame does not appear to 
have noticed the alteration, for she is as tall as ever. — TV. 
- -—>- 
CHRYSANTHEMUMS and THEIR 
CULTURE.* 
At an appropriate time, Mr. Molyneux, the famous 
Chrysanthemum-grower of Swanmore Park, issues an 
excellent treatise on the cultivation of his favourite 
flower. The Chrysanthemum is now a very popular 
flower, and deservedly so ; it cheers us with its bright 
colours during the dullest month of the year, and 
onwards through a part of the winter. So many good 
growers and exhibitors of the Chrysanthemum have 
appeared on the scene, that every pamphlet and hand¬ 
book relating thereto is attentively read and keenly 
criticised; and clever indeed is the man who can “write 
a book ” that is above criticism. 
After a careful perusal of the little book now issued, 
we have much pleasure in recommending it to the notice 
of all cultivators and lovers of the Chrysanthemum, 
as a valuable practical treatise on Chrysanthemum 
culture in all its forms and fashions. A great flourish 
of trumpets is never necessary as an introduction to a 
good article ; “good wine needs no bush,” and the 
book under notice would have lost none of its value 
had the “ Introduction ” been omitted, and the author 
•Chrysanthemums and their Culture. A practical treatise 
on propagating, growing and exhibiting, from the cutting to the 
silver cup. By E. Molyneux. London : 171, Fleet Street, E.C. 
relied on his modest “ Preface ” for an “introduction ” 
to his readers. 
We cannot agree with the author where he says, on 
p. 5—referring to the quality of the flowers, “To 
insure these in the highest possible condition, height is 
essential.” Nor is the reason unaccountable when as 
good flowers are produced on dwarfer plants. We have 
seen during the present and past seasons a number of 
instances where height has been obtained, but not a 
corresponding increase in the size of the flower ; whilst 
on dwarf plants—dwarf comparatively—we have seen 
as fine and perfect flowers as ever were exhibited. To 
see scores of tall, gawky, unnatural-looking plants in 
garden after garden, with something at the top of each 
shoot that resembles a bunch of coloured paper shavings 
or wool—but which it is, or what, we cannot decide 
until we have mounted some steps or a ladder, which 
the “ clever intelligent ” gardener places at our service 
—is hardly as satisfactory as one could wish, and we 
think that the approximate heights of varieties, given 
on pp. 53 and 54, will tend considerably to correct the 
above unsatisfactory practice, and also to mitigate the 
misconception that is liable to arise from the statement 
on p. 5, previously alluded to. There is little doubt 
that the rage for “ tall ” Chrysanthemums will decline 
almost as rapidly as it has arisen. 
Mr. Molyneux gives very good selections of the 
different sections for various purposes, and with the 
exception of the first five of the twelve incurved for 
specimens, his selections could not very advantageously 
be amended. Owing to the large size of the flowers of 
Lord Alcester, Empress of India, Queen of England, 
Golden Queen of England and Golden Empress, it is 
not possible for many good flowers to be produced by 
one plant. We have grown them as such several times 
and they were rough, loose and irregular, in fact, quite 
out of character ; we would substitute smaller-flowered 
varieties, such as Barbara, Lady Hardinge, Princess of 
Wales, Pink Venus and Mr. Bunn. 
On p. 19 the author has a “fling” at “soils of a 
complex nature,” and then on p. 21 commends no 
less than seven different materials for the composition 
of one compost; notwithstanding this inconsistency, 
we agree with what he recommends. Whilst fully 
endorsing the advice upon firm potting, we think that 
gross growth and large leaves are more frequently the 
consequence of undue feeding than of loose potting. 
In treating of pyramidal Chrysanthemums, on p. 33, 
the author says, “ Pompons are the best.” Wemusttake 
exception to this statement. Mr. Monk, of Leyton- 
stone, has repeatedly exhibited magnificent specimen 
pyramidal Chrysanthemums, such as, in all probability, 
have never been surpassed ; and his best were varieties 
of incurved, Japanese and reflexed sections. 
In the chapter devoted to the arrangement of groups 
Mr. Molyneux gives some very valuable hints, which 
competitors will do well to study and act upon. As 
regards the matter of standing the plants on ashes (see 
p. 51), we may say we always do this ; and with the 
exception of very large specimen plants in compara¬ 
tively small pots, we never found them to emit many 
roots into the ashes, certainly none to affect the welfare 
of the plants on removal. Sound advice is given in 
the matter of “ feeding ” Chrysanthemums, and should 
go far towards setting this much-debated question at 
rest. His teaching is exactly in accordance with our 
own practice, which has been most successful. The 
chapters on “Keeping the blooms,” “Preparing for 
shows,” and “Dressing the blooms” are full of well- 
considered and carefully-written details, and will be 
invaluable to all exhibitors. We cannot, however, 
accept the statement, on p. 94, that “all blooms, after 
being dressed, are smaller, especially in depth, than 
before any manipulation of the petals has taken place.” 
Our experience is exactly the opposite of this when good 
flowers are being dealt-with ; “ cupping ” reduces the 
size of all incurved flowers in a greater or less degree. 
Valuable information is given in the chapters devoted 
to “Arranging in stands ” and “ Staging at the shows 
but the author appears inclined to become somewhat 
‘ 1 grandmotherly ” over it. The remarks on * ‘ Waiting 
for the verdict ” would have been better unwritten, 
and the frequency with which the words “inexperi¬ 
enced ” and “young beginner” occur give the text a 
pedantic appearance, aud produces a disagreeable effect. 
The hints on “Taking notes” and “Studying the 
leaves of Chrysanthemums ” are most useful, and will 
benefit all who act upon them. 
The best book on the Chrysanthemum has not yet 
been written ; but Mr. Molyneux’s is the best that 
has yet appeared, and as such it should certainly be 
read by all growers and lovers of the Chrysanthemum. 
