Wi}e MfjobotJenbron ^ocietp ^oteg. 
Early hybrids of 
R. Aucklandii. 
When I was in Edinburgh, in the May of this year, I examined the batch 
growing in the open garden, with many trusses half, and one fully expanded. 
The plants seemed quite hardy, and the numerous blossoms which I have since 
received were very perfect and unscathed by frost. 
The parents are stated to be R. Aucklandii (pollen-parent) and “John 
Waterer,” a so-called “hardy hybrid’’ (seed-bearer); and kno\ving both 
parents very intimately, I have no doubt whatever that the statement is correct. 
The calyx and the scent, and the diminished stamens—which, by the way, 
are full of pollen—as well as the larger flowers and the looser truss, bespeak 
unmistakeably the pollen-parent, which in the case of alleged hybrids is the 
parent to be always specially doubted. 
Quite apart from their beauty, I think these seedlings deserve notice in your 
paper, as tending possibly to throw some hght on the subject of Rhododendron 
alliances, in such a “ confronts ’’ (?) of the species as Dr. Beccari thinks so 
desirable. 
I hope that Mr. Scott has tested their fertihty tnier se ; for “ John 
Waterer ’’ being a hybrid between R. arboreum and probably R. cataw- 
BiENSE (Mr. Waterer cannot inform me precisely), these seedlings, it will be 
observed, unite the blood of three species. “John Waterer” is a very late 
blossoming, deep crimson variety; and be the parentage what it may, the 
crimson colour is derived from R. arboreum, and the hardiness and late habit, 
etc., from another type (? catawbiense). 
The late habit was very properly selected to correct the early tendency of 
R. Aucklandii, with only partial success however, for the blood of R. arboreum 
uniting with that of R. Aucklandii (both precocious) has apparently compelled 
the seedlings to bloom much earlier than might have been anticipated from the 
tardy habit of “ John Waterer.” I would advise all Rhododendron lovers, who 
do not know R. Aucklandii, to lose no time in examining Sir Joseph Hooker’s 
book, and better still, to visit Kew next May, in which month R. Aucklandii 
is generally in bloom there. Magnificent, however, as is the portrait, taken 
from blossoms in their native land, it is scarcely worthy of the plant as since 
grown in England. Nor does the description quite do justice to its merits; 
for instance, it is called “ scentless,” whereas the Gardeners’ Chronicle, of 
May 18th, 1878, very properly describes the flowers as " of the richest fragrance.” 
Again “ flowers from three to five together in a truss ” are far below the 
standard. 
Your issue, quoted above, describing flowers grown by Mr. Boscawen, says : 
“ It is difficult to find an adjective sufficiently expressive of the majestic lovehness 
of the flower. The truss consists of nine flowers, each on a delicately frosted or 
primrose stalk, and having at the base a large pink cal 5 '^x and a broad open bell¬ 
shaped corolla five inches and more across ; of a clear white colour.” 
Mr. Boscawen’s plant, as I understand, grew and flowered in the open air 
(but in Cornwall), and I, 600 feet above the sea, and far more to the North, have 
found the species, in some senses, hardy. During the past winter I adopted the 
plan of breaking off and examining the buds every week or two. The autumnal 
62 
