February  24,  1898. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
173 
describes  Mdlle.  Lucie  Faure  as  a  Japanese  incurved.  lie  gives  it  as  his 
opinion  that  this  will  probably  rank  as  one  of  Calvat’s  best.  Surely  Mr. 
Payne  is  aware  this  variety  has  been  certificated  as  an  incurved  by  the 
N.C.S.  Has  he  copied  the  descriptions  from  Calvat’s  catalogue,  forgetting 
what  his  own  knowledge  should  have  taught  him  .’  From  so  high  an 
authority  as  Mr.  Fayne  such  information  is  somewhat  misleading  to  those 
who  depend  upon  public  writings  for  classification  of  foreign  Chrys¬ 
anthemums.  Madame  Ferlat  is  another  instance  of  misrepresentation.  It 
has  been  raany-times  staged  in  England  and  passed  as  a  true  incurved 
variety.  Here  io  is  described  as  “a  grand  massive  Japanese  incurved  of 
great  size  and  substance.”  This  statement  is  hardly  correct ;  as  an  incurved 
Chrysanthemum  it  is  not  massive,  neither  is  it  grand  as  I  interpret  the 
word.  How,  then,  can  the  remark  be  applied  to  it  as  a  .Japanese  incurved  ? 
Topaze  Orientale  is  claimed  by  many  to  be  a  very  good  form  of  Chinese 
incurved.  Exception  might  easily  be  taken  to  the  description  given  of 
Madame  Ed.  Roger  if  judged  from  an  English  point  of  view.  “This  is  a 
most  distinct  novelty,  being  of  a  pale  but  decided  sea  green  colour.” 
This  is  the  description  given  of  it.  One  naturally  asks  how  it  is  a 
“  distinct  novelty.”  Is  it  the  colour  that  makes  it  so,  or  is  it  the  misshapen 
blooms  so  often  seen  on  the  narrow  pointed  florets  which  characterise 
the  variety  ?— Observer. 
Equal  Prizes. 
I  HAVE  read  carefully  the  correspondence  which  my  note  has  brought 
forth.  I  must  confess  that  I  see  no.  reason  to  alter  ray  views  from  the 
weight  of  arguments  adduced  by  the  various  writers.  The  parallel  drawn 
by  Mr.  Beckett  as  to  decisions  given  by  judges  in  racing  is  not  a  happy 
one.  In  this  case  it  is  purely  a  physical  action  on  the  spur  of  the 
moment.  Not  so  with  flowers,  or  any  other  horticultural  produce,  where 
so  many  points  of  detail  have  to  be  taken  into  account.  I,  too,  saw  the 
disputed  groups  at  the  York  Show,  and  heard  many  comments  passed 
upon  them,  and  I  admit  these  two  exhibits  required  much  consideration 
on  the  part  of  the  .Judges.  I  was  not  alone  in  my  opinion  (not  expressed) 
that  it  was  possible  to  find  a  first  prize  where  so  many  details  admit  of 
comparison,  and  especially  when  one  of  the  exhibits  contained  a  host  of 
small  blooms  closely  packed  together.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  not 
difficult  to  see  the  other  exhibitor  might  have  made  more  of  his  Chrys¬ 
anthemum  blooms  if  he  had  made  them  less.  This  may  seem  somewhat 
of  an  enigma  ! 
lam  afraid  the  instance  cited  by  “W.  S.”  of  the  action  of  certain 
judges  at  a  West  of  England  show  does  not  assist  the  solution  of  what  is 
to  some  an  insurmountable  difficulty.  In  the  case  in  point  the  fault  was 
distinctly  that  of  inability,  as  the  i  esult  proved.  The  Dahlia  case,  quoted, 
too,  by  “W.  S.,”  affords  another  instance  of  dissatisfaction;  it  is  plain 
that  the  cultivators  knew  where  the  difference  lay  in  some  of  the  blooms 
referred  to.  “W.  S.”  says  that  the  blooms  “taken  individually  were  a 
perfect  counterpart  of  each  other  that  it  was  impossible  to  find  a  deter¬ 
mining  point.”  This  is  surely  a  case  of  pitting  the  knowledge  of  the 
exhibitors  against  that  of  the  judges.  Perhaps  these  were  such  as 
“  W.  S.”  alludes  to  in  the  preceding  paragraph  ?  I  would  ask  “  W.  S.,” 
Could  he  go  into  the  largest  Dahlia  nursery  in  the  country,  cut  and  stage 
two  stands  of  twelve  Dahlia  blooms,  distinct,  that  were  really  equal  in 
point  of  merit  of  bloom,  staging,  and  arrangement  of  colours  1  He  may 
say  yes,  because  he  would,  if  possible,  choose  duplicate  blooms.  I  do  not 
think  an  instance  can  be  cited  where  two  exhibitors  of  flov>'ers  of  any 
kind  coming  from  separate  gardens  have  staged  identical  varieties.  I 
fancy  “  W.  S.”  \vould  find  the  task  suggested  a  difficult  one. 
I  have  had  a  somewhat  lengthy  experience  in  judging  Chrysanthemums 
in  many  parts  of  the  country,  and  at  all  the  leading  shows  in  times  gone 
by,  but  I  never  came  across  a  similar  instance  to  that  named  by  “  W.  S.,” 
where  a  cash  prize  and  certificate  could  not  be  awarded  together  as  in  the 
instance  named.  I  do  not  see  any  difficulty  in  distinguishing  superior 
blooms  in  both  sections  when  in  opposition.  Neither  should  any  judge,  if 
he  has  experience  to  aid  him,  in  arriving  at  a  solution  of  the  difficulty.  I 
have  many  times  found  a  difficulty  in  selecting  the  premier  bloom  in  the 
incurved  sect'on,  but  simply  because  the  difficulty  laid  in  finding  a  bloom 
that  possessed  sufficient  points  of  approach  to  an  ideal  specimen.  Generally 
prizes  are  awarded  for  the  premier  bloom  in  each  section  ;  when  this  is  so, 
the  difficulties  of  judges  are  lessened.  Some  adjudicators  are  so  sectional, 
that  they  cannot  see  merit  in  a  bloom  if  it  does  not  belong  to  their  pet 
division.  Equal  prizes  are  too  often  awarded  under  such  circumstances. 
“  Forlorn”  (p.  108),  cites  an  instance  of  how  a  cash  prize  and  a  certificate 
were  divided.  If“  Forlorn”  had  given  particulars  of  the  blooms  selected, 
a  better  opinion  could  have  been  given  upon  the  wisdom  or  otherwise  of 
the  judges.  The  mere  quoting  of  cases  without  facts  does  not  advance 
the  argument  in  favour  of  the  awarding  of  equal  prizes. — Not  a 
Solomon. 
Sheffield  Chrysanthemum  Society. 
The  annual  dinner  was  held  on  Wednesday  evening,  the  16th  inst., 
when  over  ninety  members  and  patrons  attended,  Mr,  C.  E.  .Teffcock,  the 
President  of  the  Society,  occupied  the  chair.  Delegates  attended  from  the 
Walkley  Amateur  Floral  Society,  the  Sheffield  Floral  and  Horticultural 
Society,  the  Rotherham  Chrysanthemum  Society,  the  Rotherham  Floral 
and  Horticultural  Society,  the  Chesterfield  Chrysanthemum  Society,  and 
Wakefield  Paxton  Society.  The  Leeds  and  Barnsley  Societies  were  each 
invited,  but  no  delegates  attended.  The  dinner  was  held  in  the  large 
room  of  the  Masonic  Hall. 
After  the  loyal  toasts,  Mr.  F.  W.  Littlewood  submitted  “  The  Lord 
Mayor  and  Corporation,”  which  was  honoured  with  great  heartiness. 
Dr.  Banham  next  proposed  “The  Visitors  and  Kindred  Societies,”  to 
which  several  of  the  delegates  replied.  Mr.  J.  G.  Newsham,  in  giving 
the  toast  of  “  The  President,  Vice-Presidents,  and  Patrons,”  referred  to 
the  help  given  to  the  Society  by  those  gentlemen,  and  especially  by  the 
President,  who  was  always  ready  and  an'ious  to  do  all  he  could  to 
advance  the  interests  of  the  growers  of  Chrysanthemums  and  of  this 
Society  in  particular. 
The  President  said  the  Vice-Presidents,  the  patrons,  and  himself 
appreciated  fully  the  work  done  by  the  members,  and  especially  the 
Committee  and  the  working  officials  of  the  Society.  They  could  not  help 
being  pleased  with  the  improvement  seen  year  by  year,  and  the  trouble 
taken  by  growers  of  Chrysanthemums  to  introduce  novelties  season  after 
season.  The  success  of  the  Society  was  due  very  largely  to  excellent 
management,  and  also  to  the  desire  on  the  part  of  the  members  of  the 
Society  to  always  be  introducing  something  new. 
Mr.  A.  S.  Jarvis,  in  proposing  “The  Sheffield  Chrysanthemum 
Society,”  referred  to  the  fact  the  institution  was  sixteen  years  old.  It  was 
not  a  great  age,  but  they  had  made  great  strides,  and  their  Society  would 
compare  well  with  similar  societies  in  any  part  of  the  kingdom.  Sheffield 
stood  well  to  the  fore  in  the  matter  of  its  Chrysanthemum  show,  and  the 
greatest  credit  was  due,  not  only  to  the  officials  who  worked  so  hard,  but 
also  to  the  exhibitors  who  year  after  year  showed  such  eicellent  blooms. 
Mr.  Houseleyq  the  Secretary,  in  acknowledging  the  toast,  referred  to  the 
excellent,  work  done  by  the  Committee.  To  them  the  success  of  the 
Society  s  work  was  largely  due.  He  had  it  on  the  authority  of  one  of  the 
leading  horticultural  journals  that  the  Sheffield  Chrysanthemum  Show 
held  a  position  which  was  only  third  in  the  whole  kingdom.  Referring  to 
the  progress  of  the  Society,  the  Secretary  said  that  four  years  ago  they 
had  in  hand  the  magnificent  sum  of  9s.  6d. ;  they  were  now  worth  over 
£100.  Air,  J.  Haigh  gave  “The  Nurserymen  and  Non-competing 
Exhibitors,”  which  was  replied  to  Ijy  Air.  Artindale. 
THE  GARDENERS’  ROYAL  BENEVOLENT 
BALLOT, 
The  remarks  of  Mr.  J.  Ollerhead  (page  132),  of  this  institution,  should 
not  go  unchallenged.  AVhat  are  the  facts  in  which  he  considers  he  has 
cause  of  complaint  in  his  employer's  behalf?  A  man  who,  I  do  not  doubt, 
is  a  deserving  candidate,  is  anxious  to  be  placed  on  the  list  of  pensioners, 
but  who  has  never  subscribed  a  penny  towards  the  funds  of  this  admirable 
institution.  Consequently  he  has  to  take  his  chance  of  being  placed  on  the 
list  with  others,  some  of  whom  have  subscribed  for  several  years.  Others, 
again,  are  like  himself,  who  in  their  years  of  prosperity  failed  to  subscribe 
to  the  funds,  and  now,  when  the  day  of  adversity  has  come,  they  appeal 
to  the  subscribers  for  their  votes  and  interest  in  their  behalf. 
I  fail  to  see  where  the  hardship  comes  in.  Aly  sympathy  is  with  those 
who  have  subscribed  (or  widows  of  such),  and  who  have  to  stand  their 
chance  of  election  with  the  above.  Air.  Ollerhead  says,  “  My  employer 
and  family  have  subscribed  a  total  of  £168,”  and  considers  he  has  been 
badly  treated  because  his  nominee  has  not  been  placed  on  the  list  of 
pensioners.  I  hope  the  day  is  far  distant  before  anything  so  high  handed 
as  he  hints  at  may  be  allowed  to  have  influence  wfith  our  public 
institutions. 
If  all  those  kind  and  benevolent  people  who  have  so  liberally 
subscribed  large  sums  of  money  (all  honour  to  them  for  doing  so)  to  this 
grand  institution  were  similarly  minded  as  Air.  Ollerhead,  and  each 
selected  a  candidate  at  every  election,  on  the  same  lines,  he  would  find 
the  subscribing  gardeners  throughout  the  country  would  make  their 
presence  known.  Their  subscription  of  a  guinea  a  year,  or  ten  guineas, 
of  hard  earned  money  to  constitute  a  life  membership, means  really  more  to 
them  than  the  £168  subscribed  by  the  family  of  a  gentleman  of  wealth. 
Ai'e  we  to  be  ignored  because  fortune  has  not  smiled  upon  us  to  the  extent 
of  the  above  mentioned  figures  ? 
Provincial  gardeners  are  not  able  to  attend  the  annual  festival, 
but  through  the  gardening  press,  and  from  the  annual  report  issued  to  all 
subscribers,  we  are  well  informed  of  what  is  being  done,  and  have  every 
confidence  in  those  who  hold  the  reins  of  management.  Although  the 
majority  of  them  are  personally  unknown  to  me,  1  believe  they  have  the 
interest  of  gardeners  at  heart,  and  one  has  only  to  read  some  of  the 
speeches  delivered  at  the  annual  dinner  to  know  of  the  many  cases  of  real 
distress  among  gardeners,  and  how  they  have  appreciated  the  assistance 
they  have  received  from  this  noble  institution. 
I  would  here  appeal  to  all  gardeners,  whether  young  or  old,  to  try 
and  afford  a  guinea  a  year  to  its  funds  ;  then,  should  adversity  overtake 
them  in  their  old  age,  they  may  have  £20  a  year  for  life  simply  for  the 
asking,  and  without  the  expense  of  a  poll,  and  also  without  the  risk  of 
offending,  or  the  society  of  losing  a  rich  subscriber  in  consequence. — 
S.,  Yorks.  _ 
Rhododendron  rrh^cox. — In  various  parts  of  'the  gardens  at 
Kew  this  plant  is  now  making  a  fine  show.  The  great  objection  to  its 
extended  cultivation  is  that  the  flowers  are  often  damaged  by  frost  before 
they  are  over.  This  calamity  has  been  partially  averted  at  Kew  by 
growing  some  of  the  plants  in  positions  where  they  are  sheltered  from 
cold  winds,  and  where  the  sun  does  not  shine  directly  on  them  until 
midday,  the  flowers  thus  thawing  gradually.  Anyone  who  has  been 
unsuccessful  with  this  plant,  and  has  similar  situations  at  command,  would 
do  well  to  try  the  plan.  For  greenhouse  work,  either  forced  for  Christmas 
or  allowed  to  come  on  naturally  for  flowering  during  February,  it  is 
among  the  best  of  the  genus,  and  is  well  worth  a  place  in  any  establish¬ 
ment. — K. 
