114 
THE GARDENING WORLD. 
October 22, 1892, 
NATIONAL CHRYSANTHEMUM 
SOCIETY. 
Conference on Show Boards. 
Advantage was taken of the presence of a large 
number of growers at the Royal Aquarium on the 
12th inst. to hold a conference for the consideration 
of the question of enlarging the size of show boards 
for Japanese blooms. The meeting took place in 
the library. It was well attended, and the president 
of the N.C.S., Sir Edwin Saunders, presided. After 
the president had stated the object for which the 
meeting had been called, Mr. R. Dean, the secretary, 
stated that, acting upon a suggestion made by Mr. 
E. C. Jukes, in July last, he had sent a circular to 
all the affiliated societies inviting an expression of 
opinion on the subject at issue, and had received 
some replies which may be summarised as follows :— 
The Lindfield Society reported that it had already 
adopted the uniform size of 28 in. by 21 in. for 12 
blooms, 21 in. by 14 in. for 6 blooms, 7 in. high at the 
back, and 7m. from hole to hole. The Lewes and 
District Society saw no good reason for any altera¬ 
tion. The Borough of Longton Society thought 
that 34 in. by 28 in. would be a suitable size for 24 
blooms. The Eccles, Patricroft, and Pendleton 
Society considered that larger boards were necessary, 
but that the present width, 18 in., should not be 
altered. The Isle of Sheppey Society agreed that 
enlargement was desirable. Mr. A. R. Rundell 
reported that the Leicester Society had passed a 
resolution in favour of enlargement, and would adopt 
any size that might be definitely decided upon by 
the N.C.S. Mr. Falconer Jameson, representing the 
Hull Society, announced that in his district the 
exhibitors were unanimous in favour of moderate 
enlargement; and the Hessle Society considered 
that 28 in. by 21 in. should be the standard size. 
In the absence of Mr. Charles E. Shea in Italy, 
Mr. Dean then read the following paper:— 
ON SHOW BOARDS FOR JAPANESE 
CHRYSANTHEMUMS. 
For some seasons past there has been evidence of 
the existence, on the part of many exhibitors, of a 
growing feeling of dissatisfaction with the present 
regulations concerning the show-boards required, or 
permitted (as the case may be), to be used for the 
exhibition of Japanese Chrysanthemums. This feel¬ 
ing at length found expression in a correspondence 
which appeared in the pages of the Gardeners' Maga¬ 
zine of December and January last, wherein argu¬ 
ments pro and contra were adduced, but without that 
conclusive result which of necessity must precede 
anything like compulsory legislation on the part of 
the National Chrysanthemum Society. Hence it 
has been decided, and I think wisely, to take advan¬ 
tage of the present October show to invite a full 
and free discussion of the subject, with the 
result, it is to be hoped, that a sufficient expres¬ 
sion of opinion on the one side and the other will be 
obtained, so that the real wishes of the general body 
of exhibitors may be made apparent for the informa¬ 
tion and guidance of the society. 
It is obvious that the onus of establishing an 
affirmative case calling for alteration of the existing 
practice rests with those who assail it, and it must 
be remembered that inasmuch as the rules of the 
National Chrysanthemum Society, and of many 
other societies also, already permit the exhibitor of 
Japanese Chrysanthemums to stage his blooms on 
boards of any size, the case so to be made out must 
necessarily include the principle of compulsion, as 
well as proof that the existing regulation boards, 
with the 6-in. space between the blooms (centre to 
centre) are insufficient for the requirements of modern 
showing—at least, so far as the Japanese section is 
concerned. 
For the sake of indicating the lines which the dis¬ 
cussion must necessarily take, I would say that we 
who accept this onus probandi must be prepared to 
prove:— 
1. That uniformity of method of exhibition is so 
essential, or at least desirable, that compulsion upon 
the subject ought to prevail. 
2. That (the necessity for compulsion established) 
the existing regulation stand is insufficient for the 
adequate display of the Japanese Chrysanthemum, 
and that the necessity for an alteration outweighs 
the objections which may be urged against it. Then 
Lastly. The dimensions of the new board which 
shall be accepted as the regulation show-board of 
the National Chrysanthemum Society and its 
affiliated societies, and doubtless of most, if not all, 
of the leading Chrysanthemum Societies throughout 
the country. 
We have thus the map, or plan, of the discussion 
before us. Let us at once deal with point No. 1— 
compulsion,-compulsory uniformity. 
One argument in favour of enforced uniformity at 
once presents itself, that of analogy. We have but 
to look at the methods of exhibition of other flowers, 
notably of the great sister-queen—the Rose —to see 
that uniformity of staging is held to be an essential 
of fair competition. And I think that it requires but 
little consideration to recognise that this view is the 
correct one. The object of competitive exhibition is 
to test the comparative excellence of rival blooms, 
and it is obvious that it must tend to render this test 
more effectual if the conditions under which the 
several blooms are presented to the eye of the judge 
are as nearly as possible identical. In all scientific 
analyses and comparative examination all matters 
tending to create varying conditions are carefully 
eliminated, and why should it be otherwise with 
the judgment of the comparative excellence of 
flowers ? 
It is a matter of common knowledge that the eye 
is very easily deceived as to the relative dimensions 
of two bodies of the same size but presented to the 
eye under different conditions, and some very 
ingenious devices, having this scientific fact for their 
basis, have been utilised as advertisements for Pears’ 
Soap. So it is a fact beyond question that if the 
blooms of one exhibitor are staged on a stand with 
6 in., and another with 7 in. or 8 in. spaces, the eye 
of the judge will, in greater or less degree, be misled. 
And there is no room for such misleading when the 
results of twelve months of patient and skilful care 
are submitted for judgment, and the reputation of 
the exhibitor is at stake. 
So long as the size of the show-board is merely a 
matter of option, a prudent exhibitor will hesitate 
to adopt a larger stand for his own exhibit while his 
opponent is using a board which gives to the blooms 
a relatively larger apparent size, and, by crowding 
them together, gives to a weak and shallow bloom 
the appearance of a solidity which it does not 
possess. 
All the surroundings of competitive exhibition 
ought, as far as possible, to be uniform, and it is, in 
my judgment, a fit matter for compulsion that, as 
with Roses so with Chrysanthemums, blooms should 
be staged by exhibitors upon stands of similar 
dimensions. 
We now reach the second point. Are the present 
show-boards, with the 6 in. spaces, sufficient for the 
effective exhibition of the Japanese Chrysanthemums 
of the present day ? 
At first sight the reflection naturally presents 
itself, that, inasmuch as the present boards were 
devised very many years ago when the blooms were 
not nearly of the dimensions now attained, either 
those who were then responsible for the selection of 
the dimensions were very much at sea upon the 
subject, or thedimensions then fixed must necessarily 
be entirely insufficient for present day requirements. 
It is difficult to avoid one or other of these alterna¬ 
tives. 
But, passing from mere inference to the evidence 
of our own personal experience, can we fairly say 
that the Japanese blooms of the present day can be 
satisfactorily judged when staged upon the present 
boards ? My own opinion, and experience, is that 
it is not possible. 
It is, with certain obvious exceptions, doubtless 
substantially true, as stated by Mr. Norman Davis 
(Gardeners' Magazine, 9th Jan., 1892, page 19), that 
the present increase in dimensions of the blooms 
“ is not so much in size ( diameter I presume is meant) 
but in the depth and solidity of the blooms.” 
And it is just these important aspects of depth 
and solidity which it is impossible for the judges 
to accurately estimate when the blooms are so 
crowded that they touch each other. It is true, as 
Mr. Davis also says, that only two blooms on a 12- 
board touch each other at all four points, but six 
more touch at three points, while the corner blooms 
touch at two. This alone is quite sufficient to impede 
satisfactory judging. It must be remembered that 
judges rarely have more time, generally less, than 
they require for the proper discharge of their 
functions, and it is impossible for many reasons that 
they should lift every bloom from the “ general con¬ 
glomerate mass of interlacing petals,” which is 
almost the correct way of describing a modern show- 
stand in the smaller classes. Everything ought to 
be so arranged that the judges can, with the least 
expenditure of time and trouble, satisfy themselves 
as to how far each individual flower realises, or falls 
short of, those essentials of diameter, depth, and 
solidity which go to make up the perfect show bloom. 
And this becomes the more important in face of the 
growing demand that, in all close and important 
competitions, each individual bloom should be 
“ pointed up.” 
That a striking consensus of opinion on the part 
of a large number of the leading exhibitors, to the 
effect that the present regulation show - board is 
insufficient for the proper exhibition of such giants 
as Etoile de Lyon, and its white sport, Lilian Cope, 
Viviand Morel, E. Molyneux, et hoc genus omne, was 
brought to light by Mr. R. Falconer Jameson’s 
circular letter, few will be disposed to deny. But 
the argument has been brought forward by the 
worthy vice-chairman of the committee of the N ational 
Chrysanthemum Society ( Gardeners' Magazine, 23rd 
January, 1892, p. 45), that to enforce the use of 
larger boards would be “ practically legislating for 
the few at the expense of the many.” And he 
proceeds that “ whilst it is perfectly true that a few 
of our most successful exhibitors find the regulation 
boards too small, it is an undoubted fact that they 
are quite large enough for an overwhelming majority 
of those who show Japanese blooms.” 
Now I think that it might be replied that even 
were it conceded that the existing board is large 
enough for the majority of those who merely show 
Japanese Chrysanthemums, that fact is entirely 
beside the practical question if it be also the fact— 
as I think it is—that the board is not large enough 
for those who take the prizes. In other words the 
question at issue practically concerns, and only con¬ 
cerns, those who, with more or less regularity, make 
their appearance in the prize lists. For the larger 
number, who, throughout the country, show, but 
never, or rarely, take prizes, and who go to make up 
Mr. Jukes' “overwhelming majority,” are, 1 would 
submit, unaffected in any real sense by the change 
which it is proposed to make ; nor can it be fairly 
said that it would be at their expense. 
It may be true, as Mr. Jukes puts it, that “ small 
blooms on a board too large for them are much less 
effective than massive blooms on a small board,” and 
that the former condition of affairs is calculated to 
“ spoil the effect of the exhibit.” But we must 
remember that the substantial object in view is not 
the “effect of the exhibit” of those who have 
no chance at all of taking a prize, but the satisfaction 
of the requirements of those between whom the issue 
of first, second, and third prize must rest. 
The exhibitor who in no event can hope for a prize 
in the class in which he competes can scarcely ask 
that facilities for accurate judgment of the leading 
stands shall be withheld simply because their adop¬ 
tion would damage the “ effect ” of his own exhibit. 
Considerations of mere sentiment must give way 
to those of practical utility. 
And, I would ask, does it accord with our ex¬ 
perience that " only a few of our most successful 
exhibitors find the regulation boards too small ? ’ 
The quality of the exhibits of many, if not most, of 
those who figure in the prize lists at the chief shows 
throughout the country is fairly well known to me, 
and I must say that I think that in nearly every case 
a larger board would have more adequately dis¬ 
played their exhibits. 
To my mind the necessity for some enlargement of 
the existing regulation board in the interest of a 
sufficiently large proportion of the successfully com¬ 
peting exhibitors throughout the country has been 
demonstrated, and I would now pass to a considera¬ 
tion of possible objections to a change on other 
grounds. 
First we have that of expense. That some expense 
will attend the change is undoubted, but that 
objection, real and reasonable as it is, within certain 
limits, must not prevail to arrest a needed reform. 
We must not spoil showing altogether because of the 
expense of rendering that showing satisfactory and 
effective. 
Boards and boxes wear out, and whether a “ period 
of option ” for a season or two, leading to an after 
period of “ compulsory uniformity ” might be 
conceded to meet this point, might perhaps be a 
matter for the committee of the National Chrysanthe- 
