July  11, 1896. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
43 
Bedford,  was  first  with  Madame  Hoste,  Souvenir  de  S.  A.  Prince.  Catherine 
Mermet,  Souvenir  d’Elise,  The  Bride,  and  Ernest  Metz.  Mr.  George 
Moules  was  a  close  second  ;  and  Coi.  Fyler,  Hitchin,  followed  with  third. 
The  first  prize  for  six  distinct  blooms  was  won  by  Mr.  H.  Hunt, 
Hitchin,  who  staged  good  fiowers  of  Barthelemy  Joubert,  Mrs.  John 
Laing,  Dr.  Andry,  Her  Majesty,  Xavier  Olibo,  and  Susanne  Marie 
Rodocanachi.  Mr.  C.  Norris,  Hitchin,  came  second,  and  Mr.  Leonard 
Monies,  Hitchin,  third.  The  competition  in  this  class  was  very  keen. 
The  first  prize  for  six  blooms  of  one  variety  fell  to  Mr.  E.  B.  Lindsell 
for  Alfred  Colomb,  and  Mr.  James  Parker  was  awarded  second  for  flowers 
of  Charles  Darwin.  The  first  prize  for  six  Teas  of  one  variety  fell  to 
Mr.  James  Parker.  For  six  single  trusses  in  an  extra  class  Mr.  G.  P. 
Clark,  Hitchin,  was  first ;  and  Mr.  John  Cooper,  Hitchin,  second. 
The  premier  prize  for  six  stove  and  greenhouse  plants  was  won  by 
Mr.  A.  Titmuss,  gardener  to  W.  Tindall  Lucas,  Esq.,  Hitchin,  the 
exhibit  including  Asparagus  plumosa,  Maranta  zebrina,  Croton  varie- 
gatus,  and  Aspidistra  lurida  variegata.  For  six  exotic  Ferns  Mr. 
J.  F.  Parsons,  gardener  to  W.  Spencer,  Esq.,  Codicote  Lodge,  was  first 
with  good  examples,  Mr.  A.  Titmuss  following  with  the  second  award. 
Mr.  J.  Farrow,  gardener  to  W.  Hill,  Esq.,  Hitchin,  was  a  good  first  for 
six  Gloxinias;  Mr.  James  Upchurch,  gardener  to  F.  Lucas,  Esq., 
Hitchin,  second  ;  and  Mr.  W.  Millard,  gardener  to  W.  Ramson,  Esq., 
Hitchin,  third. 
In  the  open  class  for  thirty-six  bunches  of  hardy  flowers  the  premier 
prize  fell  to  Messrs.  Paul  Son,  Cheshunt,  whose  exhibit  was  very 
effective,  and  contained,  amongst  many  others,  blooms  of  Gaillardia 
grandiflora,  Hemerocallis  fulva.  Phloxes  Le  Solid  and  Eclaireur, 
Linum  flavum,  Scabiosa  caucasica.  Campanula  carpatica  alba,  Helenium 
pumilum,  and  Geum  miniatum.  The  Rev.  William  Crouch,  Sandy,  was 
second  with  a  showy  collection  ;  and  Messrs.  Harkness  &  Sons  took  the 
third  place. 
DO  LEAVES  ABSORB  MOISTURE  ? 
“W.  D.,  Turnford,”  appears  to  have  made  a  close  and  altogether 
a  creditable  study  of  vegetable  physiology.  He  has  told  us  much  about 
roots  and  their  appendages,  also  how  they  absorb  and  what  they  absorb 
from  the  soil.  He  has  also  told  us  a  little  about  the  leaves  of  plants  and 
the  gases  they  obtain  from  the  atmosphere.  Will  he  oblige  by  an 
expression  of  opinion  on  leaves  imbibing,  absorbing,  or  taking  in  water  ? 
The  reason  I  ask  this  question  is  that  I  not  long  ago  heard  a 
lecturer,  who  enjoys  a  reputation  as  a  scientist,  say  they  did  not,  and 
could  not,  take  in  water  in  any  form  from  the  atmosphere,  and  that  the 
freshening  of  flaccid  leaves  resulting  from  syringing  and  providing  a 
close  moist  atmosphere  was  wholly  attributable  to  the  water  or  atmo¬ 
spheric  moisture  preventing  evaporation  from  their  surfaces,  and  that 
the  leaves  revived,  so  to  say,  from  an  accumulation  of  moisture  in  them 
as  supplied  by  the  roots. 
T  could  see  the  force  of  the  learned  gentleman’s  observations,  but 
not,  I  fear,  the  whole  force.  Naturally  the  moisture  would  arrest 
evaporation,  and  the  leaves  would  freshen  in  consequence,  but  then 
when  I  take  a  flaccid  leaf  off  a  plant  and  place  it  under  water  in  a 
saucer,  leaving  the  stalk  end  above  the  water,  the  leaf  freshens.  Could 
this  freshening  occur  if  it  did  not  take  in  any  water  1  It  seems  to  me  it 
must  have  obtained  some  in  some  way,  and  I  tbink  if  it  had  been  tested 
before  and  after  immersion  by  delicate  scales  there  would  have  been  a 
difference  in  its  weight. 
The  subject  seems  to  be  an  interesting  one,  and  as,  like  many  another 
working  gardener,  after  paying  for  bools  of  various  sizes,  I  have  had 
little  left  for  books,  I  must  appeal  to  the  good  nature  of  “  W.  D.”  and 
others  who  have  books  at  command  to  enable  them  to  help  in  the 
matter.  The  lecturer  alluded  to  is  a  man  of  mark.  I  am  only — 
A  GEEEIsHOEN. 
PREPARING  YOUNG  VINES  FOR  PLANTING. 
I  HAVE  read  with  much  interest  the  articles  which  have  appeared 
in  the  Journal  on  “  Express  Grape  Growing,”  including  the  controversy 
between  Mr.  W.  Innes  and  Mr.  John  Thomson,  and  in  a  letter  from  the 
latter  on  page  495  I  notice  he  speaksfof  Mr.  Innes’  “straw-like”  Vines. 
I  have  recollections  of  an  article,  with  an  illustration,  appearing  in  your 
pages  a  few  years  ago  on  “  Preparing  Young  Vines  for  Planting,”  from 
the  pen  of  Mr.  D.  Thomson,  Drumlanrig.  I  think  it  might  prove 
interesting  and  instructive  to  your  readers  if  the  same  could  be  repro¬ 
duced  while  the  interesting  discussion  is  going  on. — John  Smith. 
Having  very  recently  superintended  the  planting  of  some  Vines 
prepared  by  two  different  methods,  I  am  led  to  send  you  a  few  words  on 
this  subject.  Probably  there  is  not  a  system  or  method  in  the  whole 
round  of  horticultural  practice  so  obstinately  stereotyped  as  that  of 
preparing  young  Vines  for  planting  as  practised  by  the  trade  and  the 
majority  of  private  growers ;  nor  is  there  anything  in  which  there  is 
more  room  for  a  change  that  would  be  advantageous  in  all  respects. 
As  long  as  I  can  remember,  and  probably  before  that  time,  the  practice 
has  been  to  shift  Vines  intended  for  “planters  ”  into  10-inch  pots,  and 
sometimes  into  a  larger  size,  growing  and  trying  to  ripen  them  to  the 
length  of  7  feet,  or  more  than  that.  Such  pots  are  much  larger  than 
necessary  to  produce  the  best  possible  description  of  “  planting  Vines.” 
The  evils  of  this  large  pot  system  are  almost  invariably  aggravated  by 
most  careless  and  inefficient  drainage,  a  too  rich  soil,  and  the  application 
of  bottom  heat.  This  combination  of  circumstances  produces  long- 
jointed  wood,  that  may  look  strong,  but  really  is  not  so  when  condition 
is  not  reckoned  by  mere  bulk.  The  roots  thus  produced  are  long,  thick, 
and  fibreless ;  having  been  surfeited  in  their  infancy  they  are  anything 
but  greedy  feeders  when  placed  in  their  permanent  feeding  quarters. 
Other  unfavourable  conditions  to  which  the  young  plants  are  subjected 
are  that  they  are  grown  in  too  crowded  a  way,  and  sometimes  turned  out 
of  doors  too  early  in  the  autumn,  where  the  process  of  maturing  is  never 
perfected.  Yet  another  injurious  ordeal  is  forced  on  the  victims  by,  in 
many  cases,  placing  them  for  the  winter  in  some  shed,  where  the  soil  is 
allowed  to  get  dusty  and  dry,  causing  the  destruction  of  any  fibry  roots 
they  may  have  formed. 
Am  I  wrong  in  saying  that  all  this  is  irrational  practice,  and  not  in 
keeping  with  this  age  of  advanced  horticulture  1  The  method  that  my 
own  experience  and  observation  lead  me  to  recommend  as  a  departure 
from  this  stereotyped  one  is  not  to  shift  the  plants  into  pots  larger  than 
FIG,  7.— VINE  FOE  PLANTING. 
6  or,  at  the  very  utmost,  7-inch  sizes,  not  to  plunge  them  in  bottom  heat, 
not  to  put  any  animal  manure  into  the  soil,  and  to  use  a  light  rather 
than  a  heavy  loam  ;  but  after  they  have  established  themselves  in  the 
pots  to  feed  them  at  the  surface  with  some  approved  manure,  now  so 
easily  obtainable.  These  conditions,  in  conjunction  with  eflSciently 
drained  pots,  will  not  be  productive  of  long  and  strong  flbreless  roots, 
but  instead  a  pot  full  of  roots  of  a  very  different  sort,  the  top  growth 
being  short-jointed,  stout,  and  well  filled  with  material  available  for  a 
good  start  when  the  planting  time  has  come.  Then  as  to  top  growth, 
the  extreme  length  aimed  at  is  quite  superfluous.  At  the  utmost  4  feet 
of  a  right  character  is  ample  length. 
Material  points  gained  by  this  lesser  pot  and  bulk  of  plant  are  ease 
in  packing  and  lightness  in  transit,  besides  the  more  restricted  space  in 
which  a  given  number  can  be  grown  ;  and  I  am  not  more  thoroughly 
persuaded  of  anything,  after  a  lengthened  experience,  than  that  such 
Vines  as  I  am  recommending  are  much  superior  for  planting  to  those 
reared  in  the  old  fashion.  In  1874,  for  instance,  I  planted  a  range  of 
vineries  with  canes  that  I  reared  from  eyes  the  previous  season,  all  of 
which  were  grown  in  G-inch  pots,  and  their  height  restricted  to  3  J  feet — 
