THE FELICITOUS FINALE 
An Announcement of the Awards in the Photo¬ 
graphic Competition for Attractive Flower Arrangements 
I T WAS a genuine pleasure to look over the two hundred-odd 
entries submitted in the Cut Flower Arrangement Contest 
which closed on May first and, when hung for judging, these 
photographs made a surprisingly arresting display, affording 
the student of ilower arrangement a perhaps unparalleled 
opportunity for comparison. We regret that our readers, in 
particular those whose interest in the art of handling cut blooms 
led them to participate in the recent competition, could not have 
enjoyed and profited by seeing the group as a whole. 
Loosely, the arrangements might be divided into two classes: 
those depending upon mass and diversity of color for their effect 
(see page 388, arrangement by Miss Mary Hayden); those 
dependent primarily upon line and giving the character of the 
individual plant free play (see arrangement by Mrs. James H. 
Heald, Jr., page 389). This second type we are apt to think of 
as Japanese because, fine students of nature, their sensitive 
appreciation never permits them to thwart or distort floral 
forms. But with all due gratitude to Japan for having pointed 
the way, the trained intuition may be trusted to evolve some¬ 
thing personal and even characteristically American, some¬ 
thing in tune with our clime and folk feeling, rather than content 
itself with merely slavish imitation. For instance, we should 
never mistake Miss Shaw’s prize-winning arrangement of 
Sweet-peas (page 359) for the Japanese,and yet it pleases because 
imbued with the thoughtful restraint, the consideration for the 
natural ways of flowers upon which the Orient, older and in some 
things wiser than we, bases all its arts. 
It is manifestly impossible to give individual notice to each of 
the many entries, few of which, however, lacked some attractive 
feature, though a number unfortunately failed in some essential 
requirement, through photographic inadequacy or a conflict of 
interest between arrangement and background. And be it 
said in passing, a suitable setting is half the victory—give the 
flowers a chance, don’t put them against a picture (See page 
389, arrangement by Mrs. R. M. Fox), wall-paper, or chintz 
that draws attention to itself and away from them! 
The following friends of gardening generously served as 
judges, each bringing to the problem the specialized discern¬ 
ment of his or her particular province and achieving in this 
fusion of four diverse and trained viewpoints an unbiased and 
intelligent judgment: 
E. A. White, Professor of Floriculture, Cornell University 
Max Schling, Decorative Florist, New York City 
Mrs. W. J. Neal, Flushing Garden Club 
Mrs. M. E. Hewitt, Garden Photographer, New York City 
The awards are as follows, the prize-winning arrangements 
and a number of others appearing on pages 359, 388, 389: 
ist Prize (Fifty Dollar Flower Vase in silver by Caldwell) 
-—Miss Margaret F. Shaw, Dept, of Botany, Vassar College, 
Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 
2nd Prize (Garden Magazine Achievement Medal in Bronze, 
Tiffany & Co.) 
—Mrs. G. L. Burnett, 892 Dearing St., Lynchburg, Va. 
High Commendation 
Mr. S. S. Berry, 745 West Highland Ave., Redlands, Cal. 
Mrs. Ole K. Olsen, 508 Millaudon St., New Orleans, La. 
Honorable Mention 
Mrs. James H. Heald, Jr., 336 Clinton Place, River Forest, Ill. 
Mrs. R. M. Fox, 451 East 28th St. North, Portland, Oregon 
Miss Mary Hayden, 1017 Grand Ave., Kansas City, Mo. 
Mrs. W. E. Rice, R. R. 6, Pontiac, Michigan 
Mrs. Samuel W. Wiley, Ruxton, Maryland 
Mrs. Oscar A. Tomlinson, Late Spring, Tennessee 
Mrs. Aubury Lee Brooks, “Poplar Hall,” Greensboro, N. C. 
Miss Josephine M. Wallace, 756 16th St., Des Moines, Iowa 
REWARDING THE CREATIVE GARDENER 
T HE Board of Regents of the University of California 
announces the establishment of the Samuel W. Heller 
Flower Prize Fund, which shall be used to award the Samuel W. 
Heller Flower Prize. 
The interest from this fund of $5,000 will be awarded annually 
to the exhibitor and grower of a flower that shows “ preeminent 
merit.” The flowers shall be judged by the scale of points 
adopted by the flower society best representing the flower in 
question, as the American Rose Society, the Gladiolus Society, 
the Peony Society, the Dahlia Society of California, etc. Five 
per cent, additional score will be given to new varieties origi¬ 
nated in the United States, and ten per cent, additional score 
will be given to new varieties originated in California. The 
prize will be awarded in 1923 to the Orchid showing preeminent 
merit. The variety selected will be the Cattleya Hybrids, as 
Brasso-Iaelia-Cattleya. Only one specimen plant in bloom 
need be entered by each exhibitor, and shall be so judged as an 
exhibit. In 1924 the prize will be awarded to the Chrysanthe¬ 
mum. Not less than 50 blooms of one variety will be considered 
an exhibit, and an exhibitor may enter but one variety for 
competition. This holds true also for the 1925 exhibit, when 
the prize will be awarded to the Dahlia showing preeminent 
merit. Beginning with the year 1926 the prize will be awarded 
to the following specific flowers: 
1926—The Rose. 1927—The Carnation 
1928—25 pots of Primula obconica, exhibited in not 
larger than 7-inch pots or pans 
1929—25 pots of Cyclamen of one variety, exhibited 
in not larger than 7-inch pots or pans 
1930—The best improved California Wild Flowers 
The prize will then be awarded in the same rotation as above, 
beginning with the year 1926, unless further notice is given, 
which must be at least three years previous to any change. The 
judging will be followed as previously suggested. 
The rules governing the judging of the specific flowers will be 
published three years in advance of the date of exhibition, 
390 
