276 
THE GARDENING WORLD. 
December 29, 1888. 
Undressed Flowers. 
We frequently read articles protesting against dressed, 
and advocating classes for undressed, blooms at flower 
shows, and especially classes for undressed Chrysan¬ 
themums. This is an old cry. Some years ago George 
Glenny and others established what they called the 
Central Society of Horticulture, and the main object 
sought was to protect amateurs and gentlemen’s gar¬ 
deners against the purchase of worthless subjects. This 
society, at one of its meetings, passed a resolution 
“seriously recommending all Chrysanthemum societies 
to adopt a class for undressed flowers.” Further, the 
members of the Central Society were required to pledge 
themselves that they would use no means to disguise a 
flower, nor conceal its defects, nor alter its character 
and all raisers or owners of novelties were invited to 
show them, that the whole of the members might, by 
ballot, decide upon their merits, recommending to the 
public and their own members, in all parts of the 
country, all those plants that were considered worthy of 
being grown. This society attempted to introduce 
classes for undressed Chrysanthemums in all shows 
held about the country; but I believe they failed in 
so ambitious an attempt. However, they did one 
praiseworthy act—they awarded a First Class Certificate 
to Merry’s Golden Christine as a hardy bwder flower. 
What would old George Glenny say if he could visit the 
earth again, and see Golden Christine occupying so nigh 
a place among exhibition reflexed Chrysanthemums ? 
Occasionally this cry for undressed flowers on the 
exhibition table crops up ; but who is to decide what 
is and what is not an undressed flower 1 This is how 
Glenny set forth the process of dressing. He is writing 
of Queen of England, and he states that by throwing 
the whole strength of the plant into one flower, the 
consequence is “a coarser growth, wild florets, and 
loose, open, moss-like flowers. This has to be met by 
a system of coaxing in dressing as the flower advances. 
The wild florets are pulled out, the petals are poked up 
towards the centre by digging a point into the bed from 
which they spring, and pressing it inwards, beginning 
not far from the middle, and repeating it all round. 
The point is then put in further back, and it sends 
another row or two back up to the first, and so it is 
continued to very nearly the outside. All the centre 
of the flower is thus closed up a good deal. The finish 
is given after cutting, when the stem is drawn down 
into a cup—nearly as wide a cup as a wine-glass—which 
squares the back petals up, and makes the otherwise 
loose flowers compact.” 
Dressing is still followed. I do not say in the very 
way in which Glenny sketched it ; but it is still done, 
and will continue to be done as long as the Chrysan¬ 
themum is employed as an exhibition flower. It is 
difficult to find in any schedule of prizes classes for un¬ 
dressed flowers, and then who is to say when a flower 
is undressed ? It is just there where the difficulty lies. 
Glenny himself states that the required symmetry in a 
flower has to be produced by a “system of coaxing in 
dressing as the flower advances,” and therefore it is a 
continuous work, and not something performed just 
previous to placing it upon the exhibition table, as is 
generally supposed. Every florists’ flower grown for 
exhibition is dressed—Auriculas, Carnations, Dahlias, 
Tulips, and many others ; and any criticisms upon the 
practice with the intention of bringing about its discon¬ 
tinuance will be as powerless to effect the purpose sought 
as it was in Glenny’s day.— R. D. 
Carnation, Souvenir de Malmaison. 
While the flowers of this fine Carnation are at all 
times acceptable, how much more so are they now 
than at their usual time of flowering ! In addition to 
the stock kept for the summer flowering, a lot might 
be set apart for the purpose of being stopped, so as to 
bring them into flower a little before, or at the present 
time. This was the plan adopted with a group I 
lately saw in flower, and there would be very little 
difficulty experienced in carrying it out. It is the 
rarest thing to be met with in Ireland, in winter¬ 
flowering collections of plants, growers usually con¬ 
fining themselves to having it in flower during June 
and July, a time when there is generally a plentiful 
supply of other flowers. Now, instead of allowing the 
present year’s layers to flower in the pots in the usual 
course, the flower stems showing during the summer 
are pinched out when they appear, and if the plants 
are shifted as they require it, and are otherwise 
attended, to before being put under glass in September, 
a gool bloom during the winter months may be 
expected from plants so treated. There is not much 
trouble with them, as it will be found that two shifts 
will be enough to get the plants into their flowering 
pots, and when they show- flowers the application of 
weak liquid manure will suffice for them. I have no 
doubt that the growth of many more difficult subjects 
to treat are attempted for the production of winter 
flowers, that give less satisfaction than this Carnation. 
-» >X - < -- 
CHRYSANTHEMUM NOTES. 
The Cutting-back System. 
For the benefit of “F. N.” (p. 211) I may say that the 
system of cutting-back Chrysanthemums to render 
them dwarf and more suitable for decorative purposes 
has much to recommend it, dwarf plants, with strong, 
healthy, dark green foliage, and flowers of good sub¬ 
stance, fine shape and colour, without coarseness, being 
invaluable especially in preparing groups for exhibition. 
They are also very convenient for housing at flowering 
time, and can often be put in the houses ■without the 
necessity of removing the stages, which many have a 
great objection to doing. 
The way to get the plants dwarf is to cut them hard 
back to from 3 ins. to 8 ins. of the bottom in the first 
week in June, beginning with the later-flowering 
varieties early in the month, say, for example, Boule 
d’Or, Grandiflorum, Meg Merrilies and yellow sport, 
Yellow Dragon, Cherub, Princess of Teck, Mr. D. B. 
Chapman, Gloriosum, Pelican. Mid-season varieties, 
such as Elaine, Mrs. G. Rundle, and Prince Alfred, 
should be cut down about the middle of June, but 
none later than this date if they are to be in flower for 
the November exhibition. To be successful it is 
necessary that the plants should be strong, healthy, 
and well established in 48-size pots, with plenty of 
good healthy roots. 
They will bleed a little after being cut back, but by 
keeping them rather dry for a day or two beforehand, 
and given only a slight sprinkling afterwards, they 
will not take much harm. Care will be necessary to 
thin out the shoots which will make their appearance 
to the required number, and to support them with 
thin sticks, or they will be easily broken. At this 
stage transfer the plants into the largest pots, and 
when rooting into the new soil remove them to their 
summer quarters, allowing ample space between the 
plants, as crowding quickly spoils their appearance, 
drawing them up weakly and ruining the foliage. As 
soon as the roots reach the sides of the pot, and are 
properly established, feed with liquid or artificial 
manure. 
The first buds produced on the shoots should in 
nearly all cases be selected as being best suited for the 
production of the largest blooms, and the height of 
the plants then correspond with the natural growth 
from break to break. Some varieties, such as Val 
d’Andorre, Mons. Freeman, Triomphe du Nord, 
Florence Percy, Coquette de Castille, Anna Roudiere, 
Cullingfordi, &c., will not reach more than 24 ins. to 
■30 ins. ; and others, such as Belle Paule, Bertier 
Rendatler, Fair Maid of Guernsey, Baroune de Prailly, 
Carew Underwood, Mons. John Laing, &c., would only 
grow 3 ft. to 5 ft., and the other varieties in pro¬ 
portion to their habits. 
I have also tried an experiment in another direction, 
and find that by using much smaller pots for some of 
the varieties than are usually recommended, and by 
limiting the number of blooms proportionately, very 
satisfactory results have been obtained. Thus specimens 
in 48 and 32 pots, both of incurved and Japanese 
varieties, in several cases gave from two to four blooms 
of exhibition size and quality, and few would expect to 
secure such returns from plants in pots so small as that. 
I find that some of the varieties are particularly adapted 
for culture in small pots without cutting them back. For 
instance, Mons. Wm. Holmes must not be stopped, as 
upon stopped plants the blooms come much lighter in 
colour, with the centre of a bronzy orange shade, and 
quite distinct from a well-developed bloom upon a plant 
that has not been stopped. 
Avalanche, also, in my opinion does not require to be 
stopped, its natural habit being dwarf. It retains its 
foliage in good condition for a long time ; it is free- 
flowering, and what is of great importance, its blooms 
expand well, and remain pure white, thus making it 
very effective as a pot plant. The number of cut blooms 
exhibited this year at the leading shows illustrates the 
fact that a really good white Chrysanthemum will 
always come quickly into favour, and proves also that 
it offers no special difficulties in culture. The value of 
this pure white Chrysanthemum as a pot plant cannot 
be overrated, especially to those who have a demand 
for white cut flowers, or for plants for conservatory 
embellishment. Lastly, let me say that the cutting-back 
system is adapted to a certain extent for the 4 ft. groups 
at the Royal Aquarium.— R. J. Hamill. 
-—>Z<-- 
MEALY-BUG ON VINES. 
At this season of the year, as regularly as the seasons 
come round, the subject of mealy-bug makes its appear¬ 
ance in the horticultural press. It is a detestable pest 
on anything, but particularly so on Tines, for when 
it gets established it finds its way into the bunches of 
ripening fruit; and I have seen bunches so badly 
attacked that they had to be dipped in a vessel of 
water, and then strung on a pole to dry before they 
were presentable. Mealy-bug on Tines is more 
frequently found in small gardens where the amount 
of glass is limited, as the vinery is turned into a plant 
house, and if some of the usual occupants of the stove, 
at all liable to the pest, are transferred to the vinery, 
it is sure to migrate on to the Tines, and when 
once it has gained a lodgment it is very difficult to 
eradicate. Preventive measures may be used that will 
tend to keep it in check, but to thoroughly stamp it 
out—make it a thing of the past, so that the vinery 
knows it no more, is a feat the accomplishment of 
which I am somewhat doubtful about. But as most 
of us have to face such a difficulty some time or other, 
perseverance must be the word. 
Having to deal with such a case myself, the pest 
being part of the stock-in-trade, as it were, that I have 
taken to, perhaps I had best state my modus opcrandi 
in trying to evict such an undesirable tenant. I have 
lately pruned the Tines to a good bud at the base of 
the spurs, and cut close off all the old snags left from 
previous pruning, then I removed all the loose bark. 
Although no advocate for skinning Tines, in fact I 
consider it a barbarous practice to so treat clean rods, 
yet when infested I would take severe measures, and 
scrape off any bark behind which there was the least 
likelihood of any bug lurking. After cleaning the 
canes I dissolved some soft soap in hot water, and added 
some paraffin, in which as an insecticide I am a great 
believer, and I may add that I have read with interest 
the correspondence anent its use that has lately appeared 
in your columns. I then gave the rods a good washing, 
using a spoke brush for the purpose. After they were 
thoroughly dry I painted them with a mixture of lime, 
soot, sulphur and tobacco powder mixed with water, 
to which soft soap and paraffin had been added, using a 
stiff paint brush, and carefully painting all over and 
filling up every crevice with the mixture. 
Some advocate the use of clay to give consistency to 
the paint, but I fail to see any deterrent in such 
ingredients against bug. After the Tines have been so 
treated, the house should be thoroughly lime-washed, 
and the woodwork painted, the paint containing a good 
proportion of turpentine, and during the growth of the 
Tines a sharp look-out should be kept for any stray 
insects that may have survived the ordeal.— Pathfinder. 
- ■— >!< — - 
CINERARIA EMPEROR 
FREDERICK. 
This singular variety made its first appearance before 
the London horticultural public on the 12th of April, 
1887, when it was exhibited at a meeting of the Royal 
Horticultural Society at South Kensington, by Messrs. 
Gordon & Sous, Haymarket, Edinburgh, and received 
a First Class Certificate under the name of Alexander 
Warwick, whom we presume was the raiser. Since that 
time it has 'passed into the hands of Messrs. James 
Carter & Co., to whom we are indebted for the 
opportunity of illustrating it in our columns. In 
March of the present year, the Messrs. Carter exhibited 
it at the Crystal Palace, when it was also certificated by 
the judges under the name of Emperor Frederick. The 
striking peculiarity of the novelty consists in the tubes 
of the ray florets being elongated to nearly the same 
length as the rays themselves. The tubular portion is 
rose-coloured, while the lamina or blade of the florets 
is of a rich dark crimson hue, and both together give 
the flower heads a singular and unique appearance. 
The small central disc is deep purple, and although the 
florets appear perfect,no pollen is produced,consequently 
no seeds can be obtained, at least, not without artificial 
fertilisation with the pollen from one of the ordinary 
varieties. The plant is, however, readily propagated 
by root cuttings or suckers, precisely in the same way as 
the double varieties. One advantage of the flowers 
being barren is that the stock cannot deteriorate, as it 
certainly would do by being raised from seeds. The 
plant is of medium height, compact, free-flowering, and 
of considerable decorative value. 
