302 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
September  26,  1895. 
ia  its  dealings  with  controversialists  should  obtain  in  all  its  trans¬ 
actions.  How  is  it  that  no  mention  has  been  made  in  previous  reports  in 
the  Journal  of  Horticulture  of  the  vegetable  section  of  the  Shrewsbury 
show  of  the  “  faulty  judging  ”  to  which  your  reporter,  unmindful  of  the 
fact  that  he  had  not  been  present  at  any  previous  Salopian  show, 
referred,  notwithstanding  that  a  very  competent  judge  and  able 
critic  from  the  office  of  that  esteemed  paper  was  present  at  the  show 
indicated  during  the  last  four  or  five  years  ? 
Your  Shrewsbury  vegetable  reporter’s  remarks  printed  below  the 
editorial  note  at  page  272  speaks  for  itself.  A  more  egotistical  effusion 
it  would  be  difficult  to  find.  He  mentions  the  grand  display  of  vege¬ 
tables  which  had  been  arranged  the  following  week  at  Heading, 
remarking  with  self-gratification  that  the  “  exhibitors  knew  the  require¬ 
ments  of  the  ‘  Heading  judges,’  and  that  the  exhibits  were  20  per  cent, 
before  those  at  Shrewsbury,  and  that  a  more  perfect  lot  of  vegetables 
was  never  seen  on  one  table  before,”  adding,  “  I  helped  in  the  judging, 
and  had  as  a  colleague  a  gardener,  who  always  favours  quality  and 
makes  no  mistakes.”  The  job  was  the  toughest  “  I  ”  ever  had,  remarks 
the  Shrewsbury  vegetable  reporter,  but  when  it  was  done  “  the  result 
defied  criticism,”  and  accordingly  the  exhibits  and  judging  have  been 
Teferred  to  in  very  complimentary  terms  in  the  report  of  the  Heading 
show.  Comment  is  needless,  further  than  to  remark  that  your  Shrews¬ 
bury  vegetable  reporter,  judging  by  his  printed  words,  considers  himself 
the  only  properly  qualified  man  in  England  to  make  just  awards  at 
vegetable  shows,  and  that,  therefore,  the  awards  made  by  men — even  by 
gardeners  to  “  great  noblemen” — brought  up  to  gardening,  and  who 
have  over  and  over  again  demonstrated  at  leading  shows  their  ability 
to  grow  and  show  garden  produce  of  the  best  description,  are  necessarily 
wrong.  Bearing  all  your  reporter’s  remarks  in  mind  the  above  is  only  a 
fair  and  reasonable  conclusion  to  arrive  at. 
In  conclusion,  I  should  like  to  be  allowed  to  ask  why  your  Shrews¬ 
bury  vegetable  reporter  has  thought  proper  to  introduce  the  words 
^‘noblemen’s  gardeners”  and  gardeners  to  “great  noblemen ”  into  the 
discu.ssion  ?  these  remarks  being  foreign  to  the  question  at  issue,  as  it 
mattered  little  whether  the  said  judges  were  gardeners  to  “  great  noble¬ 
men”  or  ex-railway  officials,  so  long  as  they  possessed  the  necessary 
qualification  and  capacity  to  enable  them  to  make  just  awards. — One 
OP  THE  Judges. 
[We  fully  agree  that  noblemen’s  gardeners  can  be  neither  better 
nor  worse  as  judges  because  of  the  position  they  happen  to  hold. 
Evidently"  One  of  the  Judges”  feels  himself  more  competent  to  sustain 
the  “  interests  of  horticulture  and  the  horticultural  Press  ”  than  some  of 
the  conductors  of  the  latter  are.  This  is  a  very  ancient  complaint,  but 
we  can  assure  our  friend  that  it  is  not  of  a  fatal  character. 
A  judge,  whoever  he  may  be,  is  as  open  to  have  his  decisions  criticised 
as  is  a  writer  to  have  his  published  views  controverted.  But  all 
discussions  should  be  concentrated  on  the  merits  of  the  case  in  each 
instance,  and  not  degenerate  into  personal  inuendo.  That  was  the  weak 
feature  of  the  communication  of  “  An  Old  Hand  ”  last  week,  and  it  is 
the  weak  feature  of  the  above  contribution.  The  repetition  of  the 
suggestion  that  our  reporter  was  prompted  to  direct  attention  to  a 
principle  in  judging  of  size  versus  quality  (and  in  suggesting  that  the 
former  predominated  at  Shrewsbury),  because  he  had  "  not  been  invited 
to  assist  in  the  awards,”  is,  to  say  the  least  an  unfortunate  insinuation, 
in  this  case  certainly  unmerited,  and  has  a  very  obvious  antithesis. 
As  “  One  of  the  Judges”  is  evidently  under  the  impression  that  we 
were  without  sufficient  grounds  for  the  statement  he  quotes,  and  to 
which  he  courteously  refers,  we  have  now  to  say  it  was  not  made  at 
random.  We  had  when  writing  a  list  of  our  reporter’s  engagements  as 
a  judge  this  year,  and  now  if  the  most  valorous  of  the  Shrewsbury 
judges  will  send  us  his  list,  also  those  of  his  colleagues,  we  will  publish 
the  respective  numbers,  and  so  remove  the  “  conjecture  ”  that  seems  to 
weigh  on  the  mind  of  an  excellent  man.] 
LARGE  CHESTNUT  TREES. 
In  the  early  months  of  the  present  year  I  spent  several  weeks  in  the 
fertile  and  interesting  island  of  Madeira,  where  my  elder  brother  has 
resided  for  nearly  sixty  years.  I  cannot  help  smiling  as  I  read  the 
account  of  these  American  large  Chestnut  trees  !  25  feet !  !  Now  in  the 
garden  of  my  brother’s  house  there  is  the  dead  trunk  of  a  Chestnut  tree  ; 
Macartney,  Heve  d’Or,  Heine  Marie  Henriette  Hoses  mingled  with 
Asparagus  Fern  clothe  the  giant  corpse  with  verdure  in  one  of  its  most 
graceful  forms.  Over  the  rugged  barked  trunk,  cracked  in  many 
directions,  quantities  of  sand  lizards  disport  themselves  basking  in  the 
sun,  darting  rapidly  away  as  you  move  along.  Several  years  ago  this 
was  blown  down  ;  fortunately  it  only  grazed  the  corner  of  the  house. 
Well,  I  am  running  away  from  the  size  ;  my  brother  told  me  it  measured 
S3  feet  round.  So  festooned  was  the  trunk  with  the  growth  over  it 
that  I  could  not  verify  the  measurement,  but  it  had  every  appearance 
of  being  at  the  least  12  feet  in  diameter.  But  this  was  not  the  largest 
in  the  island.  My  brother  said  there  was  the  shell  of  another,  and 
within  its  walls  a  whist  party  had  been  known  to  enjoy  their  gams.  Its 
measurement  I  do  not  recollect. 
To  my  thinking,  however,  these  monsters  of  growth  are  as  nothing 
compared  to  the  size  of  some  other  things  in  that  wonderfully  fertile 
soil,  which,  wherever  you  turn  your  eye,  is  redolent  of  luxuriance. 
Every  crack  and  crevice  in  the  rock  appears  to  contain  sufficient 
of  this  wonderful  soil,  aided  by  the  genial  climate,  to  give  birth 
to  huge  masses  of  scarlet  Geranium,  white  Ageratum,  and  monster 
Cacti.  A  few  things  in  this  garden  I  did  measure.  A  single  red 
Camellia,  apparently  18  to  20  feet  in  height,  and  nearly  the  same  in 
width  of  branches  ;  the  stem  of  this  is  1  foot  in  diameter.  The  Bougain¬ 
villea  goes  up  to  the  very  top  of  the  house,  and  one  on  the  terrace 
measured  3  feet  4  inches  round  the  trunk.  The  Cloth  of  Gold  Hose 
spreads  over  the  trellisworks  for  yards  and  yards,  nor  did  I  wonder 
that  my  good  friend,  Mr.  A.  Hill  Gray,  should  go  into  raptures  over  it 
when  he  saw  it. 
But  I  shall  perhaps  be  thought  drawing  the  long  bow  with  a 
vengeance  when  this  is  read.  The  back  of  the  house  is  a  comparative 
wilderness,  where  Camellias,  Cannas,  Passion  Flowers,  and  other  forms 
of  garden  beauty  are  allowed  to  follow  their  own  sweet  will  unchecked 
and  undisturbed.  About  30  yards  away  from  the  house  is  a  hard, 
apparently  stony,  road  leading  to  the  Vines  and  Coffee  plants  ;  it  is 
supported  by  a  stone  wall  as  it  rises  up  the  hill.  In  this  stony  road 
by  some  chance  a  plant  of  the  large  single  White  Macartney  Hose  has 
found  its  habitation.  Who  planted  it  I  cannot  say,  but  my  youngest 
niece,  who  is  a  long  way  out  of  her  teens,  says  that  as  children  they 
used  to  swing  on  its  branches.  The  trunk  of  this  tree,  which  is 
gnarled  and  knotted,  soon  divides  into  dozens  of  branches,  varying  in 
thickness  from  2  to  7  inches.  They  run  at  about  7  feet  from  the 
ground  parallel  with  it  for  8  or  10  yards,  supported  by  one  or  two 
rough  poles,  but  at  the  end  of  these  yards  stands  an  Oak  60  feet  high. 
The  highest  6  or  7  yards  of  this  tree  are  plainly  seen  over  the  roof  of 
the  three-storey  house.  When  standing  on  the  other  side  of  the  house  in 
the  flower  garden,  amongst  these  topmost  branches  numerous  blooms  of 
the  Hose  were  plainly  visible  at  the  time  of  my  visit  in  May.  I  was  so 
struck  with  the  extraordinary  growth  of  this  tree,  and  the  marvellous 
contortions  of  the  labyrinth  of  branches,  that  I  made  a  sketch  of  the 
same,  which  is  still  in  my  possession.  The  trunk  of  this  Hose  about 
a  foot  from  the  ground  I  measured,  and  made  it  to  be  8  feet  in 
circumference. — Y.  B.  A.  Z. 
P.S. — Since  sending  you  my  notes  on  large  trees  I  have  received 
a  letter  from  Madeira,  in  which  my  brother  writes  : — “  Our  Chestnut 
tree  is  of  slow  growth,  and  it  must  be  older  than  the  discovery  of  the 
i.sland,  I  should  say  over  700  years  old.  It  is  at  present,  as  you  know, 
merely  a  shell,  but  3  feet  from  the  ground,  when  I  measured  it,  it  gave 
me  32  feet  of  circumference.  The  one  at  Campanano  is  3  feet  larger, 
and  I  can  assure  you  that  although  the  tree  was  alive  and  giving 
Chestnuts  there  was'quite  a  small  room  in  the  interior,  to  say  nothing 
of  a  door  and  window,  and  I  have  played  whist  inside  it  with  table 
and  four  chairs,  and  two  or  three  people  looking  on  most  comfortably. 
Some  years  ago  a  Dr.  D -  took  the  house  adjoining  the  tree  for  a 
summer  residence,  and  as  he  was  fond  of  doctoring  the  poor  he  had  a 
couple  of  beds  inside  it  for  one  or  two  patients.  ’— Y.  B.  A.  Z. 
EIPENED  WOOD. 
I  DULY  note  “The  Sceptic’s”  gentle  reminder  on  page  282  re  a 
subject  fought  out,  but  apparently  not  settled  last  year.  There  are,  and 
doubtless  always  will  be,  exceptional  cases  where,  favoured  by  local 
influences  or  cultural  skill,  the  eye  is  arrested,  and  derives  such  satis¬ 
faction  in  the  contemplation  as  to  deprive  it  of  that  comprehensive  view 
necessary  to  include  so  broad  a  subject.  I  have  had  to  do  with  Pear 
trees  similar  to  the  one  with  which  “  Scsptic  ”  points  a  moral,  and  such 
Pear  trees — the  pride  of  past  generations — make,  practically,  little  or  no 
annual  growth,  being  in  fact  a  mass  of  fruit  spurs. 
I  would  not  avoid  the  cracking  of  “Sceptic’s”  hard  nuts,  but  the 
hardest  nuts  when  cracked  are  often  minus  a  kernel.  In  viewing  the 
past  season  I,  as  one  of  the  ripe  wood  men  (may  I  say  the  ripe  wood 
man  ?)  will  admit  that  it  has  given  results  similar  to  a  dog  dancing  on  its 
hind  legs — it  has  not  done  well,  but  we  are  surprised  to  see  it  done  at  all. 
To  “  The  Sceptic  ”  it  may  be  of  little  moment  to  adopt  such  simple 
precautions  as  were  laid  down  in  the  original  article  on  the  subject ;  to 
me,  if  not  a  matter  of  life  and  death,  it  is  at  least  a  matter  of  living, 
hence  the  fruit  trees.  Vines,  pot  Strawberries,  and  a  hundred  things 
must  still  have  all  the  beneflts  of  light,  air,  and  sunshine,  which  fore¬ 
thought  is  able  to  bestow,  and,  moreover,  I  venture  to  say  that  those 
who  have  obtained  the  best  results  this  season  may  attribute  their  success 
to  the  attention  paid  last  year  to  these  details. 
Prudence  may  take  the  place  of  Faith,  and  be  means  to  the  end.  It 
is  not  necessary  for  me  to  repeat  the  tenets  of  that  creed  which  was 
expounded  in  these  pages  twelve  months  since,  and  apparently  a  pro¬ 
longation  of  the  controversy  will  not,  at  present,  do  ought  towards  the 
conversion  of  a  “  Sceptic,”  nor  will  it  tend  to  the  perversion  of — 
E.  K,,  Dublin, 
Having  read  the  various  letters  on  the  ripened  wood  controversy,  it 
seems  to  me  that  the  statement  “  that  the  year  1894  was  wet,  and  that 
therefore  the  wood  of  trees  was  not  ripened,”  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to 
pass  uncontradicted,  as  throughout  Ireland,  at  least,  the  month  of 
September,  1894,  was  very  warm  and  fine,  the  rainfall  here,  I  think, 
being  about  half  an  inch  for  the  whole  month.  October  was  also  fine, 
and  I  think  that  most  fruit  growers  will  agree  with  me  that  these  two 
fine  months  would  be  quite  Eufficient  to  ripen  wood,  and,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  it  was  ripe,  and  to  this,  as  well  as  to  the  late  spring  uninterrupted 
by  frosts,  we  owe  the  large  crop  of  fruits  this  year. — E.  D'O. 
[The  weather  was  very  much  the  same  in  the  South  of  England,  the 
rainfall  during  September  and  October  last  year  having  been  far  below 
the  average.  We  think,  if  reference  is  made  to  Mr.  Symons’  tables,  it 
