564 
THE GARDENING WORLD 
May 2, 1896. 
should be cut with stalks of varying length, and 
should always be arranged with their own foliage. 
The foliage of some of the more expensive sorts 
would be too valuable to use for cutting, hence he 
would recommend the growing on of some of the 
commoner species or varieties in boxes under glass 
to supply the necessary greenery. Nothing looked 
worse than hardy Daffodils arranged with 
sprays of exotic Ferns. In his opinion, the Daffodil 
had no rival as a cut flower in early spring. It was 
cheap, graceful, lasted well, and came in very early. 
Many, perhaps, would find fault with the limited 
range of colour exhibited by the flowers, but there 
was all the less danger of these colours clashing, and 
this was something to be thankful for when ladies 
were so particular as to flowers matching with the 
carpet, the wall paper, or the ceiling Great care 
was needed in arranging such subj ect s as W allflowers, 
or Mignonette, with Daffodils, as the sap they 
exuded fouled the water and shortened the lives of 
the Daffodils. 
Miss Marie Lowe. 
The "Daffodil in Decoration ” was the particular 
phase of the subject which Miss Marie Lowe 
descanted upon. Said she, " We cannot all grow 
Daffodils, but we can all make use of them in some 
way. Little trace of them could be discovered in old 
books, with the exception of a few Dutch works. 
Even the Japanese, facile pvinceps among decorative 
artists, did not make much use of them. This led 
her to ask herself the questions—Were they known to 
them ?; Did their delineation offer too many 
difficulties?; Or were they unsuitable ? ” Continued 
Miss Lowe, “ There is no art in Nature, for art is 
simply man’s thought brought to bear upon things 
material.” She thought it rather curious, and 
decidedly very regrettable, that more use had not 
been made of the Daffodil as a subject for decorative 
designs, and she hoped that some cf the eminent 
present-day artists would come to the rescue in this 
respect. Miss Marie Lowe concluded a very 
interesting address by inveighing very strongly 
against the inartistic arrangement of beautiful 
flowers that so frequently obtained in the residences 
of the upper classes, where an incompetent servant 
was usually deputed to do the work, with the result 
that the loveliness and effectiveness of the flowers 
were seriously marred. 
Mr. William Robinson. 
A paper by Mr. William Robinsom upon the 
“ Hardy Narcissi, and their Artistic Use for Planting 
in Grass” was the next feature of the Conference. 
The essayist himself was unfortunately absent, and 
the energetic secretary of the society, Mr. J. B. 
Sowerby, was thereupon called upon to read the paper. 
An overwhelming love for hardy flowers in general, 
and Daffodils in particular, permeated every line of 
Mr. Robinson’s essay, as with facile pen he described 
the beauties of the subject of the Conference. Fair 
as an Orchid or a Lily, but as much at home as the 
Kingcups in the marsh, or the Primrose in the 
woods, the Daffodil brought its flush of golden 
beauty to our woods with no meagre or sparing hand 
during the earlier months of the year. Perhaps it 
was not suitable for planting in large quantities in 
the flower garden, but surely there was plenty.of 
room in the cool meadows, the farms, and the 
orchards, wherein it might disport itself. Ireland 
and the south-west of England hold many varieties 
that have been lost to the rest of England, chiefly 
because this extensive naturalization has been 
carried on in the former places and not in the latter. 
Three months after our native flowers have 
opened, the cool, moist mountain passes upon the 
Continent are all ablaze. No later than July i6tb, 
1894, said he, I saw some fine glowing golden patches 
in Auvergne, where the Daffodil succeeds to perfec¬ 
tion. “ Eight years ago,” Mr. Robinson went on to 
say, “ I planted thousands of Daffodils, and in every 
case they have succeeded beyond my most sanguine 
expectations. The harrowing and the rolling the 
land receives does not interfere with the foliage. 
There are numbers of garden forms that might well 
be utilised for purposes of naturalization. None but 
the hardy ones, of course, should be used ; the rarer 
forms will require good garden soil. Necessarily a 
great deal of discretion in planting must be exercised, 
for an indiscriminate scattering will surely result in 
the destruction of all sense of repose. This, there¬ 
fore, must be guarded against. It is quite as easy to 
plant in pretty ways as in ugly ways, and no one 
knows the splendid effects produced by Daffodils 
when they are grown naturally in the partial shade 
of our woods and pleasure grounds, except those who 
have seen them.” 
Dr. Crawford. 
Mr. J. B. Sowerby was also commissioned to read 
this paper, dealing with “ Basal Rot,” Dr. Crawford 
being unable to attend in person. The essayist 
opened by saying that the Rev. Woolley Dod was the 
first to describe and call by the name of basal rot 
this disease, which was reponsible for innumerable 
deaths amongst the finer sorts of Narcissi, particu¬ 
larly, and which caused so many partial and com¬ 
plete failures in their cultivation. Single and double 
flowers of the poeticus section, and some of the other 
doubles revel in rich dressings of farmyard manure, 
but many of the other doubles and the more 
delicately constitutioned varieties sicken and die in a 
couple of years under such treatment. It might be 
something of a guide to the combating of this dread 
disease if we took into account the special conditions 
under which the Daffodil was found growing wild. 
Our own Lent Lilies, for example, were found in slop¬ 
ing woods and glens where they were undisturbed 
by the hand of man. Here they flourish in a way 
that they will not do when planted in ordinary 
garden soil, N. scoticus, again, did not like culti¬ 
vated soil. 
Generally speaking, nitrogen, phosphoric acid, 
potash, and lime were the principal elements of 
plant food. Various plants differed considerably 
from each other in the special quantities they 
required of each of these; thus grasses needed 
plenty of nitrogen ; the Brassica family a liberal 
allowance of phosphoric acid, and leguminous 
plants abundance of potash. The Narcissi love 
phosphates and potash, but do not like ammoniacal 
compounds. 
The first sign of incipient disease in the bulbs was 
the presence of scorched-looking markings on the 
outer tunic. Any bulbs exhibiting these should be 
singled out and destroyed, for if planted they would 
soon die, and would, moreover, assist in spreading 
the disease to others. The cause of basal rot was 
the insidious fungus, Penicillium. With this all 
ordinary cultivated soil was teeming, as it attacked 
all sorts of vegetable growths, although it appeared 
to have a special affinity for bulbous structures, On 
cultivated soils, then, it is no wonder that the more 
delicately-constitutioned species and varieties fall an 
easy prey. He had tried surrounding his bulbs 
when planting them with such antiseptic screens as 
sand, road grit, and the soil from river banks. These 
had not been entirely satisfactory. Better results 
had been obtained when marl, which is pure 
carbonate of lime, had been employed. 
The great reason why Narcissi always did so well 
when planted in grass was that the latter subject had 
a great affinity for nitrogenous compounds, and 
speedily lessened the amount of them present in the 
soil, thus making the position favourable for 
Narcissi, which, as had been previously intimated, 
did not like nitrogenous compounds. He would 
advise, therefore, sowing down the beds with seeds 
of the finer grasses. This should be done if possible 
the year previous to the planting of the Daffodils. 
The beds might be dusted with potash each year 
about the end of January. 
Yearly lifting had undoubtedly a beneficial effect 
in preventing the spread of the rot. The Dutch saved 
a large portion of their crop from succumbing by the 
annual lifting and drying. By rushing the bulbs 
through the growing period the inherent vitality of 
the plants wards off the disease to a great extent, 
although there is no doubt that many of the Dutch 
bulbs are tainted by the rot when they reach this 
country, which disease develops rapidly after the 
bulbs have been consigned to the ground. 
He should advise all to plant their bulbs deeply, 
surrounding them with antiseptic screens, to refrain 
from high feeding, and to lift annually. 
The speedy passage of time prevented the reading 
of Mr. C. W. Cowan's paper on “ The Successes and 
Failures of Growing Daffodils in Midlothian ” ; also 
Mr. C. Stuart's, dealing with “ The Description of the 
Whitehall Group of Daffodils and their Origin,” wiih 
notes on hybridisation and cross-breeding ; and Mr. 
J. Allen’s essay on “ Daffodil Hunting in the Pyre¬ 
nees ; ” all of which would doubtless have been very 
interesting. They will, therefore, be all the more 
eagerly looked for when the full account of the Con¬ 
ference is printed. 
A vote of thanks was proposed to the writers of 
papers, and this was carried unanimously. Mr. 
Birkett, chairman of the Society, then moved a 
similar motion in recognition of the valuable services, 
as chairman, rendered by Mr. J. G. Baker. This 
was seconded by Major Cotton, and, on being put to 
the meeting, was passed with the consent of all pre¬ 
sent. 
THE SPECIES OF EUCHARIS. 
There is now a considerable amount of variety in 
the genus Eucharis both in form and size, but the 
colour is the same in all, with the exception of a few 
trifling modifications. Baker, in his Handbook of 
the Amaryllideae, describes five species with one 
variety ; but since the publication of that book some 
more forms have made their appearance. The 
species he described were E. grandiflora, better 
known to gardeners as E. amazonica, E. Mastersi, 
E. Candida, E. Sanderi, and E. subedentata. This 
included all the known species up to 1888, and two 
dwarf and small-flowered species that were some¬ 
times classed here have been relegated to Calli- 
phruria — namely, C. hartwegiana and C. tenera. 
E. grandiflora is the best known, and seems 
likely to remain so for a long time because the mcst 
useful. It long remained the largest-flowered 
species till the introduction of E. Stevensi. The 
crown in E. grandiflora is about half an inch deep, 
with a squarish bifid lobe between every two seg¬ 
ments. The tint of green more or less observable at 
the base of this cup adds rather than detracts from 
the beauty of the flower. 
E. Stevensi is by some considered a hybrid 
between E. Candida and E. Sanderi, but as far as 
the form of the flowers is concerned it is difficult to 
see the connection. The flowers are well expanded, 
and the crown is deeply divided into six triangular 
lobes on the top of which the stamens are situated. 
E. Mastersi was introduced from the Andes of 
New Grenada in 1885, and while reckoned a good 
species by some, is regarded by some as a hybrid 
between E. grandiflora and E. Sanderi. Its leading 
characteristics are the bright green leaves, resembling 
those of the last-named, and the crown, which is 
reduced to a narrow free margin with two distinct 
but blunt teeth between every two stamens. 
E. Sanderi has fairly large flowers, with segments 
each 1 in. long, but, owing to their somewhat 
ascending direction, the bloom appears somewhat 
smaller than it would otherwise be. The leaves are 
bright green, cordate at the base, and appearing 
somewhat corrugated ; consequently they resemble 
those of a Funkia to some extent. The most 
decisive and distinguishing feature of the flower, 
however, is the corona, which is reduced to a mere 
rim bordering the outer end of the expanded throat 
of the tube. It bears two or three flowers in an 
umbel, but a variety has been described with four to 
six flowers on a scape—namely, E. S. multiflora. 
E. Bakeriana is also a relatively large-flowering 
form with spreading segments, but the cup-shaped 
corona is of medium length with two triangular 
teeth or lobes between every two stamens. It has 
been described as a new species, and by other 
authorities reckoned a natural hybrid between E. 
Candida and E. grandiflora. In any case, it is a very 
pretty form, and quite distinct from anything else. 
It was introduced from Columbia, and first described 
when it flowered in 1890. 
E. Candida was introduced from the Andes of 
New Grenada, and described from a plant which 
flowered at Kew in 1877. The most striking feature 
about it is that the corona is divided almost to the 
base, into six segments, each of which bears a 
stamen. This, indeed, gives a clue to the origin of 
the corona, which really consists of the flattened 
bases of the filaments united in a cup in most of the 
species or forms. 
E. Lowii has been variously reckoned as a species 
by Mr. Baker, of Kew, and by other authorities as a 
geographical form of E. grandiflora. The flowers 
are of large size, and readily distinguished by three 
of the segments being incurved at the sides and 
scooped, as it were, like the flowers of Narcissus 
poeticus recurvus. 
E. subedentata is one of the smallest species of 
the genus, and the crown is altogether absent or 
occasionally represented by small teeth at the base 
of the filaments; hence the specific name. The 
perianth is funnel-shaped, and six to eight small 
white flowers are borne in an umbel. It is of easy 
cultivation, flowering in winter, and pretty, though 
