74 
JOURNAL  OR  HORTIGULTURR  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
Janua-y  27.  1898. 
opinions,  although  they  may  be  of  value,  tend  to  somewhat  dilute 
those  who  are  better  favoured  in  having  had  such  varieties  placed  before 
them.  In  making  these  remarks  upon  this  portion  of  the  subject 
I  cast  no  reflection  upon  the  ability  of  those  who  may  have  assisted 
in  a  previous  election,  but  take  the  present  opportunity  of  explaining 
why  the  difference  in  the  number  of  electors  is  so  great,  comparing 
the  thirty-three  of  the  present  election  with  the  107  of  the  last. 
Invitations  in  the  present  case  numbered  thirty-seven,  and  thirty- 
three  sent  lists  in  time  for  compilation.  I  desire  to  thank  all 
those  who  so  heartily  co-operated  in  obtaining  the  returns — work 
which  Avas  sincerely  entered  upon  and,  I  am  sure,  much  enjoyed 
by  all.  To  Mr.  James  Threlfall,  my  assistant,  thanks  are  equally 
due  for  services  cheerfully  rendered  in  tabulating  the  returns  so 
carefully  and  accurately. 
A  few  remarks  upon  the  position  of  certain  varieties  and  the 
result  of  the  election  may  not  be  out  of  place. 
Dealing  first  with  the  Japanese  section,  as  being  more  popular 
than  the  incurved,  I  find  that  in  the  selections  of  fifty  varieties  the 
thirty-two  electors  (one  who  is  a  noted  grower  of  incurved  did 
not  feel  qualified  to  include  the  Japanese)  sent  in  190  names,  showing 
how  diverse  are  the  opinions  amongst  experts  as  to  which  varieties  are 
really  the  best.  At  the  last  election  258  varieties  were  named  by  the 
105  electors,  proving  that  the  greater  the  number  of  electors  the  greater 
the  divergency  of  opinion.  In  the  year  1895  sixty-nine  electors  named 
187  varieties  in  the  selection  of  thirty-six.  In  the  election  the  year 
previous,  in  obtaining  the  names  of  the  best  twenty-four,  ninety-three 
varieties  were  given  by  the  forty-six  electors. 
In  the  present  instance  no  fewer  than  fifty-nine  names  of  varieties 
are  given  once ;  nineteen  are  mentioned  twice ;  while  twelve  others 
receive  three  votes  each.  These  figures  reduce  the  number  of  varieties 
down  to  exactly  100,  which  really  is  not  a  very  wide  range  to 
select  fifty  I'rom.  The  reduction  of  the  numbers  in  this  way  shows 
that  there  is  a  greater  concentration  upon  the  really  improved  varieties 
than  has  occurred  before. 
Even  a  cursory  glance  at  the  selected  fifty  will  shoAV  that  electors 
of  experience  have  made  their  choice  with  due  regard  to  the  quality  of 
the  flowers,  and  not  merely  for  their  size.  The  bulk  of  the  fifty  are 
noted  for  an  improvement  in  form  coupled  with  a  good  mixture  of 
colour.  If  we  except  Etoile  de  Lyon,  Mrs.  C.  H.  Payne,  and 
International  it  would  re(]uire  a  stretch  of  prejudice  to  say  that  the 
list  contains  varieties  which  are  coarse  or  lack  refinement. 
In  the  present  election  no  less  than  seven  varieties  tie  for  the 
premier  position.  It  would  be  difficult  indeed  to  say  which  of  the 
seven  is  entitled  to  the  first  place  on  the  list.  In  the  1895  election 
three  varieties  tied  for  this  distinction.  In  the  year  previous  the 
same  number  were  bracketed,  while  in  1896  four  earned  the  dis¬ 
tinction.  It  cannot  be  other  than  pleasing  to  Mr.  Cannell  and  myself 
to  find  the  variety  bearing  my  name  occupying  so  high  a  position  after 
being  cultivated  twelve  years.  No  other  variety  in  the  first  fifty 
can  claim  more  than  seven  years’  service,  this  being  Viviand  Morel. 
Sunflower,  which  occupied  such  a  high  position  as  tenth  on  the  list 
in  1896,  has  now  fallen  so  low  in  the  estimation  of  elector’s  that  it 
only  receives  two  votes  in  the  present  list.  Take  again  Stanstead 
White,  which  was  tenth  on  the  list  in  the  1894  election,  and  now  only 
receives  a  single  vote.  Even  that  charming  variety  Mdlle.  Therese  Rey, 
which  was  only  four  votes  behind  the  premier  in  1896,  now  fails  to 
find  more  than  seventeen  supporters. 
It  cannot  be  said  that  the  hairy  varieties  are  popular  with  the 
electors.  Not  a  single  one  is  to  be  found  in  the  first  fifty.  Even 
Hairy  Wonder,  which  is  the  best  of  the  type,  gets  no  more  than  ten 
votes,  while  Mrs.  Alpheus  Hardy,  the  pioneer  of  the  section,  is  not 
once  named. 
Those  persons  who  are  partial  to  the  Japanese  incurved,  of  which 
I  class  Robert  Owen  as  a  typical  variety,  have  not  much  cause  for 
satisfaction,  as  with  the  exception  of  Australie,  Oceana,  Modesto, 
Lady  Byron,  Western  King,  and  Sunstone  the  section  is  poorly 
represented.  Even  Robert  Owen  fails  to  obtain  more  than  eight 
votes.  Viscountess  Hambledon,  a  charming  variety  when  seen  in 
proper  character,  receives  support  from  only  seven  electors. 
Cultivators  and  lovers  of  Chrysanthemums  generally  appear  to 
favomr  varieties  of  the  type  of  floret  of  Madame  Carnot,  Mutual 
Friend,  Phoebus,  Mons.  Hoste,  Simplicity,  and  Viviand  Morel.  He 
indeed  would  be  a  bold  person  who  would  say  these  are  not  of  a 
desirable  type  to  encourage.  All  possess  the  characteristics  of  depth 
of  floret  as  well  as  width  of  bloom.  The  Meg  IMerri.ies  tyi^e  of  bloom 
is  not  so  much  in  request  nowadays,  and  fortunately,  as  it  was  some 
years  ago. 
A  few  brief  extracts  from  letters  received,  showing  the  opinion 
in  which  the  election  is  held  by  various  electors,  will  be  a  fitting 
conclusion  to  these  rather  longer  notes  than  I  at  first  intended  them 
to  be. 
Mr.  J.  Dumble,  Picton  Castle  Gardens,  Haverfordwest,  writes:  — 
“  I  am  very  glad  you  are  again  publishing  the  lists.  I  am  sure  they 
serve  a  most  use.ul  purpose,  and  I  am  also  sure  your  labours  are 
appreciated.” 
Mr.  R.  Jones,  Barford  Hill  Gardens,  Warwick,  says: — “it  will  be 
interesting  to  compare  the  1896  lists  with  those  of  1893,  as  many  in 
the  former  must  make  room  for  newer  introductions.” 
Mr.  Folkard,  Sand  Hutton  Hall  Gardens,  York,  writes: — “With 
so  many  new  Japanese  introduced  each  year  it  is  difficult  to  know 
which  to  choose  for  the  best.  I  wish  you  every  success.” 
Mr.  C.  J.  Salter,  Woodhatch  Gardens,  Reigate,  says I  Lave 
pleasure  in  forwarding  list.  It  is  a  difficult  matter  to  place  the 
incurved  varieties.  The  so-called  incurved,  such  as  IMa  Perlection, 
Lady  Isabel,  and  Duchess  of  Fife,  must  take  a  high  position  in  the 
list,  owing  to  their  size.  In  my  opinion  they  should  be  relegated 
to  the  Japanese  incurved  class.  By  all  means  have  classes  lor 
Japanese  incurved.” 
Mr.  A.  Sturt,  Round  Oak,  Englefield  Green,  Ascot,  writes  ; — “I 
am  pleased  to  see  you  are  again  at  work  in  endeavouring  to  obtain 
from  growers  the  best  varieties  for  exhibition,  and  also  those  of 
recent  introduction.” 
Mr.  A.  Haggart,  Moor  Park  Gardens,  Ludlow,  says: — “I  am 
very  pleased  to  comply  with  your  wish  re  selection  of  Japanese 
Chrysanthemums,  and  the  results  must  be  very  serviceable.” — 
Edwin  Molynedx. 
[We  wish  to  tha  .k  most  cordially  Mr.  Molyneux  and  all  who 
have  aided  him  in  carrying  out  the  object  in  view — namely,  the 
determination  by  experts  and  skilled  cultivators  of  the  best  present- 
day  Chrysanthemums  for  exhibition,  including  those  of  the  newer 
varieties  which  have  been  sufficiently  tested  for  an  uniirejuJici  d 
opinion  to  be  formed  on  their  merits.  We  should  like  for  all  new 
varieties  of  promise  to  be  tested  by  the  greatest  possible  nnniLer  of 
growers,  in  order  that  a  full  and  fair  estimate  may  bo  obtained  ol^ll.eir 
merits  in  the  autumn. 
We  take  all  responsibility'^  for  placing  Mr.  Molyneux’s  jiatrunymic 
at  the  head  of  the  list  of  what  may  be  termed  maximum  equals.  We 
think  it  entitled  to  the  position  on  the  ground  of  seniority,  apart  from 
the  fact  that  no  decided  improvement  on  it  has  yet  been  j, rod  need  in 
its  own  distinct  and  brilliant  character.  We  must  watch  the  develop¬ 
ment  of  Joseph  Chamberlain— a  progressive  name. 
Comments  on  the  selected  eighteen  new  Japanese  varieties  and 
thirty-six  incurved  varieties  will  follow  with  the  tabulated  lists  another 
week. — Ed.] 
Votes  for  the  Best  Fifty  Japanese. 
28  Australian  Gold 
27  G.  J.  Warren 
32  E.  Molyneux 
32  Viviand  Morel 
32  Madame  Carnot 
32  Charles  Davis 
32  Edith  Tabor 
32  Phoebus 
32  Mons.  Chenon  de  Lech^ 
31  Mrs.  H.  Weeks 
31  Australie 
30  Simplicity 
30  Mutual  Friend 
29  Oceana 
28  ■  Pride  of  Madford 
27  Modesto 
27  IMons.  Panckoucke 
26  Mrs.  J.  Lewis 
25  Lady  llidgway 
24  Mrs.  W.  H.  Lees 
24  Lady  Hanham 
24  Madame  Gustav  Henry 
24  Etoile  de  Ly>..a 
23  Graphic 
23  Lady  Byron 
21  Eva  Knowles 
