November  7, 1895. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
433 
Duchess  of  Newcastle  (Sherwood).  —  A  syn.  of  Queen 
Boadicea. 
Duchess  of  Suthekland  (Gibbons),  —  Byblcemen.  Shape  fair  ; 
base  pure  ;  best  when  feathered,  when  the  feathering  is  a  rosy  purple 
in  colour.  First  broken  in  1843,  and  not  often  seen  now. 
Duchess  of  Sutherland  (Groom). —  Rose.  Shape  long;  pure; 
formerly  esteemed  as  a  feathered  rose.  It  is  still  grown  to  a  limited 
extent,  but  is  now  generally  flamed. 
Duchess  of  Sutherland  (Walker). — Bybloemen.  Shape  inferior; 
base  and  filaments  beautifully  pure.  This  variety,  raised  near  London 
about  forty-five  years  ago,  was  brought  into  notice  by  Mr.  Goldham  as 
a  feathered  flower.  Despite  its  “cocked  hat  ”  shape,  its  dazzling  purity 
and  bright  purple  markings  caused  it  to  become  a  general  favourite,  and, 
although  a  shy  grower,  it  is  still  extensively  grown  as  a  flamed  flower, 
although  it  cannot  now  be  considered  first  rate.  The  late  Mr.  Norman 
of  Woolwich  used  this  variety  largely  to  raise  seedlings  from,  and  raised 
some  fine  varieties,  which  have  never  yet  got  into  general  cultivation. 
Duke  of  Cambridge  (Norman). — Bizarre.  Dwarf  ;  shape  good ; 
base  pure  ;  heavily  feathered  with  dark  red.  A  fine  variety,  but  very 
scarce. 
Duke  of  Devonshire  (Dickson).— Bizarre.  Tall  ;  shape  fair  ; 
pure.  A  vigorous,  strong-growing  variety,  coming  early  into  bloom, 
and  when  feathered  is  still  bad  to  beat.  The  yellow  ground  inside  the 
flower  is  good,  and  shines  as  if  varnished  ;  it  is,  however,  much  paler 
outside.  When  flamed,  in  which  state  it  is  now  generally  seen,  the 
flower,  although  well  marked,  has  scarcely  any  base,  and  looks  dingy 
outside,  although  inside  the  markings  are  well-nigh  black.  It  was 
broken  and  named  over  fifty  years  ago  by  Mr.  James  Dickson  of  Brixton 
from  one  of  Clark’s  breeders.  Other  growers  also  broke  and  named  it. 
Syns.,  Milton,  Sphynx,  Gog,  Lord  Strathmore. 
Duke  of  Edinburgh  (Haynes). — Bizarre.  Shape  good  ;  base  pure  ; 
best  in  feathered  state,  when  the  feathering  is  a  chestnut  brown,  very 
even  and  beautiful ;  the  ground  colour  is  a  deep  rich  golden  yellow. 
It  increases  very  slowly,  and  does  not  expand  very  freely.  As  a  flamed 
flower  it  is  worthless,  having  no  base.  It  was  certificated  at  the 
National  Exhibition  in  1875.  A  seedling  from  San  Jos4,  and  still  very 
scarce. 
Duke  of  Hamilton  (Slater). — Bizarre.  Pure  ;  an  inferior  variety, 
first  broken  flamed  in  1843,  and  still  to  be  found  in  some  collections  in 
the  breeder  state. 
Edgar  (Naylor).  —  Byblcemen.  Formerly  much  esteemed  as  a 
feathered  flower  ;  marking  colour  dark  and  constant,  white  ground  very 
pure,  but  the  filaments  invariably  stained. 
ABOUT  ANTI-BLIGHTS. 
See  pages  424  of  last  week’s  issue,  where  your  reporter  goes  on  to 
say,  “  an  interesting  discussion  followed  Mr.  Sutton’s  lecture.”  At  this 
Chrysanthemum -mad  time  doubtless  you  have  more  matter  than  you  can 
manage  to  wedge  in,  but  I  think  nevertheless  the  “  discussion  ”  was 
sufficiently  important  for  me  to  ask  you  to  try  and  crowd  in  a  few 
remarks  upon  it.  Mr.  Sutton  touched  upon  anti-blight  powders  doubt¬ 
fully  as  to  their  freedom  from  poisonous  qualities,  but  to  clear  his 
conscience  in  those  respects,  he  recommended  those  kinds  of  Potatoes 
only  to  be  grown  that  can  maintain  comparative  freedom  from  disease. 
Yes,  exactly  so  ;  but  where  are  they  to  be  found  ?  With  the  exception 
of  a  very  few  coarse  sorts,  which  I  do  not  think  the  Messrs.  Sutton 
would  care  particularly  to  countenance,  I  do  not  know  of  them.  I  well 
know  the  firm’s  more  recent  introductions,  and  others  yet  to  come,  I 
advised  the  late  Mr.  Clark  how  to  cross.  He  was  fond  of  his  garden, 
and,  like  “Inspector”  at  that  time  of  day  (page  291),  was  wont  to 
“  devour  ”  the  matter  from  the  columns  of  the  old  *•  Cottage  Gardener.” 
Myself  and  Mr.  J.  P.  Jones,  head  of  the  Messrs.  Sutton’s  Potato  Depart¬ 
ment — to  whom  we  are  more  indebted  than  999  out  of  1000  wot  of,  for 
the  selected  excellence  of  the  esculent — paid  a  visit  to  Mr.  Clark.  1 
saw  at  once  that  he  was  too  “  sweet  ”  on  intercrosses  with  American 
sorts,  and  advised  him  to  desist.  “  Well,”  he  said,  “  what  will  you  advise 
me  to  cross  with  ?  ”  I  answered,  “  I  began  English  crossing  in  1860 
with  Fox’s  Seedling  and  the  Cambridge  Kidney,  but  as  I  think  you 
must  feel  a  greater  interest  in  Magnum  Bonum  than  any  other  man,  you 
can  cross  it  with  Fox’s,  and  depend  upon  it  far  better  results  will  be  likely 
to  follow  than  you  can  ever  expect  by  dabbling  with  those  from  the 
other  side  of  the ‘herring  pond.’”  “But,”  he  rejoined,  “  where  can  I 
get  the  Fox?”  I  happened  to  know  the  Messrs.  Sutton  retained  it 
amongst  some  choice  reserves.  Mr,  Jones  sent  it  to  Mr.  Clark.  This  is 
how  the  recent  excellent  Potatoes  of  the  Reading  found  their  way,  and 
they  constitute  the  blood,  so  to  speak,  of  one  of  the  best  and  oldest 
English  Potatoes,  blended  with  that  providential  variety  alluded  to, 
found  in  Mr.  Clark’s  garden  when  we  were  almost  in  despair  about  losing 
our  Potatoes  from  disease  altogether. 
With  Messrs.  Sutton’s  new  and  finer  strains  in  my  dark  and  fertile 
garden  soil  I  should  not  feel  safe  with  them  if  minus  the  powder  or  the 
spraying  mixture,  which  amounts  to  the  same  thing  wetted.  I  consider  it 
in  its  powder  form  of  a  nicer  method  of  application  than  the  wet,  sloppy 
plan.  I  should  have  felt  satisfied  with  less  than  I  have  written  to 
explain  myself  to  you  had  I  not  been  buttonholed  as  the  audience  were 
dispersing  by  two  gentlemen,  who  assured  me  I  was  wrong  and  that  Mr. 
Sutton  was  right  about  the  anti-blights  being  poisonous.  I  answered 
them,  I  never  said  they  were  not ;  but  that  the  secret  from  running  any 
risk  of  being  poisoned  with  them  was  to  apply  the  powders  properly — 
to  begin  by  the  puffings  on  to  the  infantile  foliage  or  fruits,  and  by  so 
doing  prevent  the  fungoids  having  the  slightest  chance  of  establishment ; 
that  it  was  too  late  when  they  had  done  so.  1  further  explained  to  my 
antagonists,  who  from  their  language  and  look  hailed  from  the  other  side 
of  the  silver  streak,  that  the  powder  I  use  would  not  injure  the  most 
delicate  foliage ;  but  it  would,  as  I  have  proved,  produce  health  and 
strength  to  sickly  plants  in  their  young  and  tender  stage  and  maintain 
them  so,  and  so  also  free  from  aphis  and  other  depredatory  insects  when 
used  in  time  and  as  frequently  as  intelligent  observation  sees  necessary. 
I  tried  to  impress  upon  my  foreign  friends  that  if  they  allowed 
mildews  or  what  not  to  become  established  upon  either  foliage  or 
fruit,  crude  and  drastic  eradicants  must  then  be  employed,  which  in 
most  cases  proved  worse  than  the  disease,  plus  a  chance  of  poisoning 
people  “around  Paris”  or  anywhere  else.  I  also  explained  how  this 
idea  worked  upon  me  when  first  mooted.  My  Grapes  were  ripe.  The 
Royal  Muscadine — Chasselas  Musqud  “  around  Paris  ” — with  the  Malbec 
bellows  I  well  powdered  three  bunches  and  partook  of  them,  powder 
and  all,  to  show  that  if  it  meant  poisoning  then  was  the  time,  and  upon 
the  right  person.  It  will  not  be  necessary  for  me  to  perform  this  teat 
again  ;  I  felt  none  the  worse  after  it.  As  to  my  Potatoes,  well,  surely 
if  any  deleterious  effects  pertained  to  them  after  my  operations  above 
ground,  both  me  and  my  family  must  have  found  our  places  under¬ 
ground  long  ago.  Pray  do  not  let  the  bugbear  frighten  good  people  any 
longer. — Robt.  Fenn. 
PLANTING  WALL  TREES. 
I  AM  not  surprised  to  find  that  the  watchful  eye  of  “A.  D.”  has 
discovered  a  singular  error  in  my  recent  article  dealing  with  this  subject, 
and  I  must  thank  him  for  being  good  enough  to  point  it  out  in  his  note 
on  page  415.  What  I  really  wrote  was,  “This  ought  to  be  trodden  firmly, 
unless  it  happens  to  be  heavy  or  wet.”  Unfortunately,  however,  the 
pen  will  sometimes  indulge  in  rapid  flights,  which  are  not  favourable 
to  the  production  of  true  caligraphy.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to 
find  that  printers,  like  other  mortals,  sometimes  make  mistakes.  I 
noticed  the  error  when  reading  over  the  article,  and  was  inclined  to 
forward  a  correction,  but  in  the  end  refrained  from  doing  so  because  I 
thought  every  reader  would  see  that  it  must  be  a  typographical  error,  as 
in  its  printed  form  I  was  made  to  advocate  a  practice  entirely  opposed 
to  everything  I  had  previously  written  on  the  subject. 
“  A.  D.”  also  asks,  “  Would  it  not  be  wiser  to  get  out  the  holes  and 
fill  right  to  the  top  with  the  new  soil  fully  a  fortnight  before  the  trees 
came  to  hand,  so  that  the  soil  would  settle  down  naturally  ?  ”  Perhaps 
it  would  from  a  theoretical,  but  I  think  not  from  a  practical  point  of 
view.  Good  loam  when  cut  from  a  heap  such  as  is  usually  used  for 
wall  trees,  is  invariably  in  just  the  right  condition,  neither  too  wet  nor 
too  dry,  for  planting  fruit  trees  in.  Why,  then,  place  it  in  the  holes 
where  perhaps  it  may  become  thoroughly  sodden  by  the  time  the  trees 
are  in  readiness  for  planting,  and  thus  delay  for  days,  or  it  may  be 
weeks,  the  performance  of  an  operation  which  if  possible  should  not  be 
delayed  ? 
In  regard  to  the  query,  “  Is  it  not  a  mistake  to  advise  the  making  of 
too  deep  holes  and  filling  up  with  too  rich  soil  ?  ”  I  answer.  Certainly  it 
is.  But  did  the  article  in  question  contain  such  advice?  I  trow  not. 
Indeed,  the  depth  I  gave  for  the  holes  differs  but  little  from  that  which 
“  A.  D.”  considers  sufficient  in  ordinary  soils.  My  advice  was  to  dig 
holes  30  inches  in  depth  on  light  soils,  and  6  or  9  inches  less  on  heavy 
ones.  His  criticism  on  this  point  therefore  seems  to  me  to  be  of  a 
rather  hair-splitting  nature,  and  I  think  if  “  A.  D.”  had  to  deal  with 
the  light  hungry  soil  of  this  district  he  would  regard  the  extra  depth  a 
decided  advantage.  By  all  means  let  us  encourage  surface  roots  as 
much  as  possible,  but  we  want  some  to  penetrate  a  good  depth,  as  well 
to  help  the  trees  through  hot  seasons.  Without  them  I  fear  we  should 
have  more  numerous  additions  to  our  “  ripened  wood  nuts  to  crack.” 
If  my  friendly  critic  considers  turfy  loam  too  rich  for  filling-in  the 
holes,  what  does  he  consider  a  good  substitute  for  it  ? — H.  D. 
RIPENED  WOOD. 
A  REPLY  to  my  critics  was  impossible  last  week,  owing  to  pressure 
of  work  caused  by  the  sudden  and  early  advent  of  winter.  There  is, 
however,  little  for  me  to  traverse  in  either  communication,  the  writers’ 
remarks,  though  professedly  adverse  to  my  contentions,  being  really 
confirmatory  thereof.  Both  “  Y.  B.  A,  Z.”  and  “  D.  I.”  agree  that 
green  wood  will  produce  good  Peaches — indeed,  the  former  goes  out  of 
his  way  to  support  me  by  relating  that  story  of  the  “coarse  branch  on 
an  Apricot  tree,”  which  “  had  more  fruit  on  it  than  all  the  rest  of  the 
tree  put  together.”  Moreover,  while  thus  upholding  my  views  he  also 
incidentally  shows  that  I  am  not  the  first  nor  the  only  sceptic  who  has 
scoffed  at  the  ripened  wood  theory.  Yet  notwithstanding  these  awkward 
facts  “  Y.  B.  A.  Z  ”  is  so  perverse,  and  “  D.  I.”  appears  to  be  the  same, 
that  he  prefers  red,  roasted  wood  to  green  wood,  presumably  only 
because  it  looks  prettier.  That  it  is  so  I  freely  acknowledge  ;  but  being 
a  practical  man,  and  growing  Peach  and  Nectarine  trees  for  crop  and 
not  for  ornament,  I  like  verdant  rather  than  rosy  wood,  and  for  the 
simple  reason  that  I  get  better  results  therefrom. 
“  Y.  B.  A.  Z.”  fancies  I  was  disingenuous  about  the  tree  moved  down 
to  Somersetshire.  This  is  a  mistake  on  his  part,  as  I  can  assure  him  of 
my  complete  mystification.  His  simple  tale  is,  however,  now  quite 
explained  by  saying  that  both  trees  were  moved.  Doubtless  native 
obtuseness  was  to  some  extent  responsible  for  my  blunder  ;  but,  at  the 
