524 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
June  17,  I'W. 
'Weeds  ought  never  to  be  suffered.  Any  weed-killer  lotion  we 
have  tried  has  been  highly  efficacious.  Salt  distributed  fairly 
over  the  weeds  or  mosses  means  destruction.  Hand-weeding  is 
preferable  to  hoeing.  With  diligent  eyes  be  alert  towards  repairs, 
being  careful  to  firm  the  mended  parts.  Nothing  adds  so  much 
to  the  enjoyment  of  gardens  and  pleasure  grounds,  as  do,  what  we 
do  not  always  find,  but  ought  to  have — namely,  feet-comforting 
walks. — A  Young  Scot. 
Rose  Show  Fixtures  for  1897. 
Jmne  18th  (Friday). — Portsmouth  (N.R.S.). 
„  23rd  (Wednesday). — Richmond,  Surrey. 
„  24th  (Thursday). — Colchester. 
„  25th  (Friday). — Maidstone. 
„  26th  (Saturday). — Windsor  and  Dorking. 
„  29th  (Tuesday). — Canterbury,  Hereford,  Sutton,  and  Westminster 
(R.H.S.). 
„  30th  (Wednesday). — Croydon,  Ealing,  Farnham,  and  Reading. 
July  1st  (Thursday). — Eltbam. 
„  2nd  (Friday). — Crystal  Palace  (N.R.S.). 
„  6th  (Tuesday). — Diss. 
„  7th  (Wednesday).— Glasgow,  Hanley,*  Hitchin,  Reigate,  Leeds, f 
and  Tunbridge  Wells. 
„  8th  (Thursday). — Bath.  Bedford,  Farningbam,  Gloucester,  Harrow, 
Newcastle-on-Tyne,f  and  Woodbridge. 
„  10th  (Saturday). — Manchester. 
„  13th  (Tuesday). — Wolverhampton  .f 
„  15th  (Thursday). — Norwich  (N.R.S.)  and  Helensburgh. 
„  17th  (Saturday). — New  Brighton. 
„  22nd  (Thursday). — Halifax  and  Trentham. 
„  27th  (Tuesday). — Tibsbelf. 
„  28th  (Wednesday). — Chester.* 
„  31st  (Saturday). — Liverpool,* 
*  Soows  lasting  two  days.  f  Shows  lasting  three  days. 
Comments  and  Impressions— Medals  and  Prizes. 
fSJ  The  numerous  schedules  that  now  remind  as  of  the  approaching 
shows  bring  forward  a  subject  that  has  often  been  discussed  by 
committees,  but  never  definitely  decided — namely,  the  relative 
value  to  exhibitors  of  medals  or  cups  and  money  prizes.  There  is 
so  much  to  be  said  on  both  sides  of  the  question  that  it  is  not 
likely  it  ever  will  be  settled,  and  the  best  way  out  of  the  difficulty 
appears  to  have  been  taken  by  most  societies  in  offering  both 
medals  and  money  in  certain  classes.  I  was  present,  a  short  time 
since,  at  a  meeting  of  a  provincial  society  where  the  matter  was 
brought  forward  and  vigorously  discussed,  especially  by  two  of  the 
members,  whom  we  will  name  respectively  as  Mr.  Cups  and  Mr. 
Cash.  The  former,  a  very  successful  and  thorough  amateur  grower 
and  celebrated  athlete,  stoutly  maintained  that  competition  for 
money  prizes  was  utterly  opposed  to  the  true  apirit  of  amateurism. 
He  contended  that  there  should  be  sufficient  interest  in,  and  love 
for,  the  Rose  to  insure  abundance  of  exhibits  without  the  induce¬ 
ment  of  money.  Cups  and  medals  he  considered  to  possess  ten 
times  their  intrinsic  value,  and  he  referred  to  the  pride  he  felt  in 
tbe  array  of  auch  substantial  rewards  that  he  was  able  to  show  to 
his  friends,  and  which  served  as  so  many  mementoes  of  pleasant 
days  and  hard-earned  successes.  “Mere  money  prizes,”  he  con¬ 
cluded,  “would  never  have  brought  one  iota  of  the  satisfaction  cups 
and  medals  had  yielded,  and  all  societies  ought  to  encourage  a 
similar  spirit  by  offering  more  prizes  of  that  kind  rather  than 
pander  to  the  ‘  money  grabbing  ’  propensity  that  proved  so  detri¬ 
mental  to  the  true  spirit  of  horticultural  competition.” 
Mr.  Cash,  in  reply,  congratulated  hi*  friend  upon  being  in  that 
happy  position  which  enables  a  man  to  disregard  such  trifles  as  the 
expenses  attendant  upon  exhibiting.  He  thought,  however,  that 
there  were  many  other  equally  ardent  lovers  of  the  Rose,  and 
equally  desirous  of  extending  a  general  interest  in  it,  but  who 
unfortunately  had  not  such  full  purses  that  they  could  meet 
demands  of  this  nature  without  the  assistance  which  he  contended 
societies  should  always  render.  The  majority  of  such  prizes  at 
local  shows  rarely  provided  for  little  more  than  the  average 
expenses  of  the  exhibitors,  and  he  stated  that  having  kept  an 
accurate  record  of  all  expenses  and  prizes  won  in  ten  years  he  found 
after  a  fairly  successful  career  there  was  a  balance  in  his  favour  of 
5s.  He  thought  that  no  man  could  be  accused  of  “money-grabbing” 
with  such  a  record,  which  he  thought  would  correspond  to  that  of 
many  others. 
The  contention  was  continued  at  some  length,  with  the  result 
that  the  Committee  decided  to  do  precisely  what  others  have 
done — namely,  to  offer  both  medals  and  money  prizes  in  the  chief 
classes,  because  it  is  a  compromise  that  appeals  to  the  good  sense 
and  experience  of  the  majority.  It  is  undoubtedly  a  great  question 
how  far  exhibiting  pays  even  the  most  successful.  Trade  growers 
it  is  understood  look  for  other  than  direct  returns,  although  when 
they  have  so  many  thousand  plants  to  cut  from  it  is  doubtful  if 
they  could  sell  the  flowers  to  such  advantage.  To  the  amateur  and 
gardener,  however,  it  is  chiefly  a  matter  of  reputation,  and  the 
number  who  turn  to  exhibiting  as  a  source  of  gain  alone  is  so 
small  that  they  need  not  be  reckoned  with  at  all,  for  they  generally 
find  a  large  share  of  disappointment  if  they  have  not  the  love  of 
the  cause  which  animates  the  true  gardener,  from  peers  and 
parsons  downwards.  *  _ 
It  is  often  a  subject  of  deep  regret  to  me  to  hear  exhibiting 
decried,  because  I  know  by  long  experience  what  an  immense 
stimulus  and  encouragement  it  gives  to  many  a  worthy  man.  A 
valued  friend,  whom  we  will  call  “  Lady  Cecily,”  some  time  ago 
said,  in  the  course  of  conversation  on  this  subject,  that  she  would 
not  allow  her  gardener  to  exhibit  Roses  or  anything  else,  because 
she  thought  it  would  waste  a  lot  of  time,  and  that  he  would  be 
devoting  too  much  attention  to  what  he  wished  to  show  to  the 
neglect  of  other  matters.  Happily  I  was  able  to  point  out  several 
instances  in  the  district  where  this  restriction  was  not  imposed,  and 
yet  the  gardens  were  admirably  kept  in  every  department  and  at 
no  greater  cost.  Further,  by  showing  how  closely  a  gardener  is 
wedded  to  his  calling,  how  few  pleasures  he  has  outside  his  duties, 
and  how  small  his  earnings  are  compared  with  the  knowledge, 
experience,  and  time  his  occupation  demands,  I  induced  her 
ladyship  to  allow  her  gardener  the  privilege  of  exhibiting,  and 
the  result  is  explained  in  the  following  extract  from  a  recent 
letter  :  “  I  am  quite  delighted  with  the  improvements  Brown  has 
carried  out  in  the  gardens  this  year,  and  we  are  becoming  greatly 
interested  in  his  exploits  at  the  shows  ;  he  was  very  successful 
last  year,  and  the  Roses  are  very  promising  for  the  present  season. 
I  am  sure  you  were  right  about  the  exhibiting,  for  Brown  has 
been  much  more  energetic  since  I  allowed  him  to  measure  his 
strength  against  our  neighbours,  and  I  am  thoroughly  satisfied  in 
every  way.”  _ 
The  medal  question  brought  to  my  mind  an  episode  concerning 
a  beautiful  Rose  which  may  be  said  to  be  peculiarly  appropriate  to 
the  present  year — i.e.,  Her  Majesty,  which  ought  to  be  shown  in 
its  best  form  for  the  sake  of  its  name.  I  was  walking  through  the 
exhibition  at  South  Kensington  when  the  late  Mr.  BeDnett  of 
“  Pedigree  Rose  ”  fame  came  up  with  a  particularly  brilliant 
expression  on  his  face.  “You  look  happy,  Mr.  Bennett,”  said  I. 
“Is  the  world  using  you  well?”  “  Lappy,  my  dear  sir,”  said  he 
in  an  excited  tone,  “  I  have  never  been  so  happy  in  all  my  life.  I 
have  just  been  awarded  a  gold  medal  for  Her  Majesty.  Think  of 
that— -a  gold  medal !  Why,  I  would  sooner  have  that  than  a 
present  of  £100.”  How  true  that  was  anyone  who  knew  Mr. 
Bennett  will  realise,  for  he  possessed  an  enthusiasm  which  carried 
him  outside  all  petty  consideration  of  £  s.  d. 
By  the  way,  what  an  interesting  exhibit  could  be  made  of  the 
Roses  which  have  been  brought  out  daring  the  Queen’s  long  reign, 
though  I  imagine  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  many  of  those  raised 
in  the  earlier  years.  I  have  a  copy  of  the  “  Rose  Fanciers’ 
Manual,”  by  Mrs.  Gore,  published  in  1838,  the  year  after  the 
Queen’s  accession  to  the  throne,  and  it  is  surprising  how  few  of  the 
varieties  therein  described  or  mentioned  (over  1600)  are  now 
known  to  cultivators.  Gloria  Mundi  and  York-and-Lancaster  are 
the  two  most  notable  of  the  older  varieties,  while  Lamarque  has  a 
place  amongst  the  Noisette  Roses,  of  which  no  less  than  ninety*- 
three  are  described,  as  this  type  was  even  then  in  great  favour  with 
the  French  growers.  It  i*  interesting  to  note  what  Mrs.  Gore 
says  about  the  collection  of  Roses  then  of  note.  She  says  the 
finest  are  those  of  the  Horticultural  Society  formed  by  Professor 
Lindley,  of  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  formed  by  Mr.  Paxton.  Mr. 
Sabine,  whose  valuable  treatises  on  the  Rise  are  well  known, 
formed  some  years  ago  a  collection  at  North  Mimms,  and  one  of 
the  earliest  and  most  interesting  made  in  England  was  that  of 
Charles  James  Fox  and  St.  Anne’s  Hill.  Referring  also  to  the 
Rose  nurseries  —  Messrs.  Rivers  of  Sawhridgeworth  ;  Messrs. 
Loddiges  of  Hackney,  “  who  cultivated  2500  varieties  ;  ”  Messrs. 
Lee  &  Kennedy,  and  Messrs.  Henderson  of  Kilburn.  In  noting 
the  popularity  of  the  Rose  in  France,  it  is  said  that  one  grower 
“  produces  annually  from  slips  in  a  small  forcing  house  50  000 
plants  of  five  varieties.”  Will  any  of  our  British  firms  surpass  that 
in  the  present  Diamond  Jubilee  year  ? — A  Midland  Rosarian. 
