January  7,  1807. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
13 
genus  Alopecurus  represent  “cunning  the  soft  species  of  Holcus, 
of  little  value,  tell  of  “  uselessness,”  and  the  handsome  Melic 
Grasses  suggest  “elegance.”  Well  may  the  Quaking  Grasses,  by 
their  agitation,  remind  us  of  “restlessness”  or  “fussiness,”  but 
“volatility”  does  not  seem  to  be  so  suitable  a  meaning  for  the 
Rye  Grasses.  The  Holy  Grass  (Hierochloe  borealis),  which  grows 
in  the  far  North,  was  so  named  because  at  one  period  it  was 
gathered  to  strew  about  churches  on  some  festivals.  Like  the 
Reed,  the  Oat  is  a  symbol  of  music,  and  the  golden  Wheat  of  our 
fields  is  a  sign  of  plenty. — J.  R.  8.  C. 
APPLES. 
Judging  at  the  Crystal  Palace. 
In  reply  to  Mr.  Mclndoe  (page  615,  last  vol.)  I  wish  to  say  I  brought 
forward  no  argument  of  my  own  (in  a  previous  note),  but  simply  wrote 
to  state  a  fact.  The  R.H  S.,  in  its  schedule  of  the  autumn  fruit  show 
held  at  the  Crystal  Palace,  arranged  two  lists  of  Apples,  one  headed 
“dessert  Apples”  the  other  “cooking  Apples,”  while  under  another 
heading  in  the  schedule  a  clause  is  inserted  for  the  guidance  of  both 
exhibitors  and  judges  relating  to  the  collections,  which  says,  “In 
distinguishing  dessert  and  cooking  varieties  be  guided  (as  far  as  it 
goes)  by  Division  4.”  Under  the  above  distinct  headings  Emperor 
Alexander  Apple  is  placed  in  the  latter.  —  C.  Herrin,  Dropmore , 
Maidenhead. 
[Our  correspondent  is  quite  correct.  The  Society  evidently  felt  the 
desirability  of  giving  precise  guidance  on  the  point,  and  it  would  be 
well  if  other  societies  would  follow  the  example,  as  then  exhibitors 
would  know  that  if  they  infringed  the  toording  of  the  schedule,  and 
especially  with  “  intention  to  deceive,”  not  otherwise,  they  would  be 
liable  to  disqualification.  [Code,  page  11,  par  38.]  With  two  lists  of 
Apples  only  we  cannot  imagine  many  persons  doing  otherwise  than 
following  the  example  of  the  R.H.S.  in  respect  of  the  Apple  in  question, 
and  in  our  opinion  it  was  placed  in  the  right  list.] 
Disqualifying  at  Shows. 
All  exhibitors  should  be  grateful  for  the  test  you  have  submitted  for 
determining  the  question  of  disqualification  at  shows — namely,  “  Is  any 
judge  entitled  to  disqualify  any  exhibitor  who  has  not  infringed  any 
rule,  or  ignored  any  condition  or  stipulation  in  the  schedule  that  may 
be  provided  for  the  guidance  of  all.”  There  can  be  little  doubt  regard- 
the  answer  such  a  question  is  likely  to  elicit — viz.,  a  decided  No  !  Every 
exhibitor  is  justified  in  availing  himself  of  the  privilege  of  staging 
anything  he  may  choose  within  the  rules  of  the  schedule,  and 
no  judge  has  any  right  to  disqualify  an  exhibit  simply  because  it 
contains  something  out  of  keeping  with  his  personal  views.  Is  it  not 
as  much  the  duty  of  judges  as  of  exhibitors  to  act  strictly  within  the 
terms  of  the  schedule? — R.  C.  H. 
[Before  closing  the  discussion  on  the  York  disqualification,  which  we 
think  will  do  good,  we  may  say  (1)  That  a  long  communication  has 
been  sent  to  us,  the  result  of  a  request  by  persons  interested  in  the 
question,  and  who  supplied  the  writer  of  the  communication  with 
materials  and  a  schedule  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  his  views.  (2)  That 
the  said  writer,  who  is  an  old  exhibitor,  arrives  at  no  more  definite 
conclusion  in  seven  hundred  word-i  than  that  “exhibitors  must  read  the 
schedule  of  a  show,  and  take  their  chance.”  (3)  That  no  schedule  has 
been  sent  to  us  by  either  of  the  disputants  or  officials.  (4)  That 
Mr.  Riddell  is  entitled  to  say  he  is  disappointed  by  the  decision  arrived 
at  not  to  let  the  case  go  to  arbitration  before  a  high  and  impartial 
tribunal,  willing  to  act  from  a  sense  of  public  duty.] 
Classification  of  Apples. 
As  I  think  I  was  one  of  the  first  (last  year)  to  call  attention  to  the 
necessity  of  the  classification  of  Apples  by  some  recognised  authority  for 
exhibition,  I  should  like  to  have  my  say  on  the  proposals  put  forward  by 
Mr.  Wilks. 
I  am  sorry  I  must  differ  from  him  and  vote  for  three  lists,  Kitchen, 
Table,  and  K. T. ,  and  this  simply  because  things  are  so,  and  no  amount 
of  expediency  or  argument  can  alter  the  fact,  Blenheim  Pippin,  for 
instance,  is  a  good-looking  Apple  and  a  good  dessert  Apple,  and  to  label 
it  as  not  the  one  or  the  other  would  be,  in  my  opinion,  a  mistake. 
I  see  no  reason  why  it  and  a  few  similar  Apples  should  not  be 
exhibited  in  both  classes  without  confusion  ;  but  if,  as  seems  likely,  I 
should  be  in  a  minority,  I  would  loyally  accept  the  decision  of  the  R.H.S. 
— W.  R.  Raillem.  _____ 
I  WAS  pleased  to  read  the  letter  in  last  week’s  Journal  written  by  the 
Rev.  W.  Wilks  on  the  classification  of  Apples  for  show  purposes,  and  to 
find  that  the  Royal  Horticultural  Society  is  willing  to  take  up  the 
question  of  kitchen  and  dessert  Apples.  Why  not  Pears  also,  and  give 
us  authoritative  lists  of  each  ? 
Mr.  Wilks  asks  whether  two  definite  lists  are  to  be  made,  or  are  three 
wished  for.  As  far  as  my  opinion  and  experience  go,  I  should  say  two 
only.  I  cannot  see  that  a  third  list  is  at  all  needed.  For  instance,  if 
8Dy  horticultural  society  wished  to  offer  prizes  for  a  collection  of  six, 
twelve,  or  twenty-four  varieties  of  Apples,  it  could  be  so  expressed  in  their 
schedule  without  reference  to  dessert  or  kitchen,  when,  of  course,  any 
variety  would  be  admissible ;  but  when  dessert  or  kitchen  are  specified 
an  authorised  catalogue  of  such  from  the  Royal  would  be  a  great 
assistance  to  exhibitors  and  judges. 
If  such  a  list  is  published,  the  question  will  arise,  How  is  it  to  be  put 
into  practice  ?  In  a  great  measure  it  must  remain  optional  with 
provincial  societies,  but  I  think  all  those  in  union  with  the  Royal  should 
be  bound  by  its  rules.  Societies  not  in  union  could  insert  in  their 
schedule  something  like  the  following  notice : — “  The  R.H.S.  definition 
of  dessert  and  kitchen  fruits  will  be  adhered  to ;  ”  and  when  such  notice 
is  not  given  judges  would  be  glad  of  such  an  authority  as  the  Royal  to 
refer  to  in  case  of  disputes. 
These  presumed  lists,  and  the  above  remarks,  of  course  do  not  apply 
in  any  way  to  private  family  use. — J.  Easter,  Nostell  Priory  Gardens. 
Cooking  and  Dessert  Apples. 
I  have  been  wondering  whether  much  of  the  trouble  which  has 
resulted  of  late,  and  the  discussion  which  has  grown  out  of  that  trouble, 
is  not  more  the  product  of  the  improper  use  of  arbitrary  terms  than  of 
common  sense  requirements.  Thus  we  find  the  classification  of  certain 
named  Apples  in  the  R  H.S.  fruit  show  schedule  quoted  as  authority  in 
one  way,  and  a  member  of  the  R.H.S.  Council,  Mr.  Bunyard,  writing 
in  deprecation  of  that  view  in  relation  to  so-called  intermediate  varieties. 
Now,  in  providing  for  named  single  dish  classes  in  this  schedule  why  are 
the  arbitrary  terms  cookiDg  and  dessert  used  at  all  ?  If  any  specific 
variety  be  asked  for  what  consequence  is  it  whether  called  cooking  or 
dessert  ?  Only  samples  of  the  variety  will  be  shown  in  its  proper  class, 
and  it  is  entirely  unimportant  that  any  other  heading  than  its  class 
number  and  name  be  furnished. 
The  only  classes  of  a  single  dish  nature  to  which  the  terms  may  apply 
are  those  for  “  any  other  variety  ;  ”  but  unless  these  are  tasted,  or  some 
other  more  rigid  rule  of  judging  be  applied,  they  may  for  any  good 
they  are  be  excluded.  The  framers  of  the  schedule  should  insert 
separate  classes  for  all  the  known  best,  and  the  rest  will,  if  worth 
anything,  find  representatives  in  the  collections.  Then  in  relation  to 
these  it  will  be  said  there  must  be  some  classification.  That  iB  so,  no 
doubt,  but  it  should  not  be  of  the  arbitrary  nature  at  present  in 
existence.  I  greatly  prefer  collections  “  for  S  ze  and  Appearance,”  and 
the  same  “  for  Flavour  and  Appearance.”  In  such  cases  there  could  be 
no  disqualifications  whatever,  as  all  the  fruits  would  be  judged  according 
to  their  merits  in  their  respective  classes.  But  when  the  arbitrary 
terms  “  cooking  ”  or  “  dessert  ”  are  introduced  then  you  open  the  door 
at  once  to  objections,  that  “  this  is  not  a  cooking  Apple  ”  or  “  that  is 
not  a  dessert  variety,”  and  so  on,  leading,  as  the  recent  discussion  has 
shown,  to  endless  dissension,  and  entirely  without  reason. 
We  have  seen  many  inferior  eating  varieties  hard  in  flesh,  and  com¬ 
paratively  flavourless,  classed  as  dessert  varieties,  and  admitted  to  such 
so-called  collections,  that  really  have  not  one  tithe  the  beauty  of 
appearance  or  soft  pleasant  flesh  which  characterises  many  others  that 
have  been  arbitrarily  excluded  from  “  dessert  ”  classes,  simply  because 
of  the  employment  of  arbitrary  terms.  Medium  sized  pretty  fruits  of 
Duchess  of  Oldenburg,  Emperor  Alexander*  Blenheim  Pippin,  Cox’s 
Pomona,  Peasgood’s  Nonesuch,  Gascoigne’s  Scarlet,  Lady  Henniker, 
Roundway  Magnum  Bonum,  very  large,  yet  one  of  the  best  flavoured 
Apples  in  cultivation  ;  Prince  Albert,  Queen  Caroline,  just  now  first- 
rate  ;  and  many  others. 
I  wonder  how  many  gardeners  there  are,  including  some  who  have 
written  strongly  in  favour  of  arbitrary  classification,  who  do  not  send 
some  samples  of  those  varieties  to  table  when  they  have  them,  and  have 
neither  Cox’s,  Ribstons,  or  King  of  the  Pippins  for  use?  Nay.  it  is 
possible  to  tire  of  having  these  excellent  varieties  every  day.  If  the 
R.H  S.  will  set  the  example  by  refraining  from  employing  henceforth 
arbitrary  terms  in  relation  to  their  Apple  or  Pear  classes  they  will  do 
much  to  clear  the  air  of  the  existing  confusion  and  disputation. — 
A.  Dean. 
[This  is  a  new  idea  and  worthy  of  consideration.  The  question  of 
dessert  and  culinary  Apples  is  entirely  one  of  individual  fancy.] 
Keeping  Apples. 
That  every  variety  of  Apple,  chiefly  according  to  the  softness  or 
firmness  of  its  flesh,  has  its  ordinary  keeping  period,  is  of  course  the 
case ;  but  keeping  properties  may  be  aided  or  deteriorated  by 
methods  or  places  of  storing.  Still,  kept  with  ever  so  much  of 
care  there  must  be  certain  deterioration  if  the  varieties  be  kept  over 
their  natural  period.  I  have  often  wondered  how  many  of  the  fine 
looking  Apples  shown  late  in  winter  are  really  good  in  quality.  If 
they  be  not  good,  there  can  be  no  merit  whatever  in  tne  keeping 
of  them  so  late.  Then  it  is  well  worth  ascertaining  what  methods  of 
keeping  do  best,  apart  from  appearance,  to  preserve  quality  in  the  flesh. 
That  is  a  matter  with  respect  to  which  we  may  well  have  much  of 
experimenting.  Very  low  temperatures  will  not  do  for  Apples,  although 
in  such  cases  appearance  may  be  preserved. 
A  very  cold  atmosphere  does  undoubtedly  deteriorate  flesh  quality, 
just  as  a  dry  atmosphere  shrivels  and  absorbs  juice  or  moisture.  If  ever 
British  growers  of  Apples  are  to  compete  with  the  winter  imports  of 
these  fruits  from  America,  they  will  have  to  discern  which  are  not 
merely  the  cheapest,  but  also  the  most  efficient  means  of  storing  to 
preserve  flesh  quality,  as  well  as  good  appearance,  as  long  as  possible. 
It  is  probable  that  the  most  expensively  built  stores  would  not  be  by 
any  means  the  best.  Concrete  built  sheds,  having  walls  12  inches  thick, 
and  thatched  heavily  with  straw,  especially  if  erected  beneath  trees, 
would  probably  not  only  exclude  all  frost,  but  keep  a  very  equable 
temperature  within.  If,  too,  the  floor  be  the  soil  only,  the  shelves 
made  of  open  trellises  with  the  rough  edges  planed  off,  and  changes  of 
air  occasionally  permitted,  the  very  best  results  would  be  obtained. 
—A.  K. 
