tlje i^ljotiotiEnliron ^ocietp Motti 
R. Fortunei, as I saw it growing in the open air at River Hill, Mr. Roger’s 
place, ought to be the ancestor of a splendid race of hardy plants, scented, 
floriferous, and coloured. Mr. Luscombe has, or had, the same excellent type, 
scarcely inferior (the Botanical Magazine says superior) to R. Aucklandii. 
The variety at Kew, on the other hand, is vastly inferior, and indeed contemptible. 
Such is an illustration of the puzzles connected with Rhododendron judging. 
R. Aucklandii presents the same diversity of type (see remark in Hooker’s 
Rhododendrons) ; so does R. Dalhousi^, R. Thomsonii, and, indeed, nearly 
every species. 
It is impossible to mention R. Fortunei without adding a few words on 
R. Aucklandii, which I seem this year to have proved to be absolutely hardy 
against winter frosts. The two species are very nearly aUied, although the 
latter comes from Sikkim, and the former from a remote part of China ; but 
then we know next to nothing of the country lying between. 
Mr. Boscawen grows magnificent trusses of R. Aucklandii in the open air, 
of which the Gardeners’ Chronicle (see number of May 18th, 1878), says : 
“ It is difficult to find an adjective sufficiently expressive of the majestic loveliness 
of the flower ” ; and Mr. Otto Forster has kindly sent me a photograph of a 
plant which, in his winter garden at Augsburg, bore 122 trusses of bloom. 
Unfortunately there is no illustration that I know of which does justice to the 
splendour of the flower. As the Gardeners’ Chronicle, cited above, remarks, 
even Sir J. Hooker’s plate falls very far short of the reality. 
J. H. M. 
70 
