308 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTTGULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
April  7,  1891: 
The  "  Carnot  ”  Mystery. 
Be  Mr.  Haggan’s  query. — Madame  Carnot  is  pure  white,  G.J.  Warren 
is  canary  yellow  (colour  of  Australian  Gold),  Mrs,  W.  Mease  is  pure 
primrose.  They  are  three  perfectly  distinct  varieties. — W.  Wells. 
^Ir  Wells,  in  a  leaflet,  publishes  the  following,  which  I  ask  you 
to  place  in  parallel  columns.  The  “  puzzle  ”  seems  to  me  to  decide 
how  such  sports  happen.  The  dates  suggest  that  the  honour  of  having 
the  first  belongs  to  Mr.  Lees,  though  granted  that  Mr.  Knowles’  is 
original,  the  identity  of  the  leading  features  is  remarkable.  See  below. 
“  Gardeners’  Magazine,”  December 
25  th.  1897. 
The  plants  of  G-  J.  Warren  dis¬ 
tributed  last  spring  were  either  too 
weak  through  over-propagation  to 
give  good  flowers  or  else  it  is  not 
going  to  prove  so  satisfactory  as  its 
parent,  Madame  Carnot.  I  have  not 
seen  nor  heard  of  a  really  first-rate 
flower  being  shown,  and  one  is  in¬ 
clined  to  the  opinion  that  a  guinea  is 
too  much  to  pay  for  a  plant  that  is 
not  vigorous  enough  to  produce  an 
exhibition  flower. — W.  H.  Lees. 
“Gardeners’  Chronicle,”  February 
12th,  1898. 
Plants  of  G.  J.  Warren  distributed 
last  spring  were  probably  too  weak, 
or  it  will  not  prove  so  satisfactory  as 
its  parent.  I  have  not  heard  of  a 
really  good  first-rate  flower  being 
shown  this  season,  and  in  my  humble 
opinion  a  guinea  is  too  much  to  pay 
for  a  plant  that  is  not  vigorous 
enough  to  produce  an  exhibition 
bloom. — E.  IvNOAVLES. 
This  seems  to  be  'a  case  either  of  “  too  much  alike  varieties  ”  or  “  the 
same  variety  under  different  names.”  It  appears  (if  Mr.  Wells  is  correct) 
that  after  seeing  blooms  Mr.  Lees  first  ordered  four  plants  of  G.J.  Warren 
and  subsequently  two  more,  and  was  so  satisfied  that  he  wished  the  name 
changed  to  Mrs.  F.  A.  Sevan.  He  will  be  glad  now,  as  his  plants  did  not 
give  a  first-rate  bloom  last  season,  that  the  name  was  not  changed. 
It  does  not  appear  how  much  money  Mr.  Knowles  expended  over  the 
variety,  but  he  declares  he  had  not  heard  (he  omits  the  “  seen  ”)  of  a 
really  “good  first-class”  bloom  (Mr.  Lees  omits  the  “good  ”).  If  anyone 
has  seen  a  first-class  bloom  that  was  not  “good”  would  it  not  be  a  bit  of 
a  curiosity  ?  We  often  hear  of  the  same  kind  of  Chrysanthemum  “  sports” 
occurring  in  different  places,  but  it  is  not  often  that  two  literary  “  sports  ” 
so  very  much  alike  blossom  within  about  six  weeks  of  each  other — one 
near  Barnet,  the  other  near  Henley-on-Thames.  Yes,  this  Carnot  question 
is  a  “  mystery.”  Who  can  solve  the  problem  1  I  know  nothing  of  Messrs. 
Wells,  Lees,  Knowles,  or  your  southern  dons,  and  am,  as  we  say  in  our 
parts,  “fair  puzzled.” — A  Northerner. 
I  HAVE  read  in  your  issue  of  31st  ult.  (page  286),  Mr.  Alex.  Haggart’s 
justifiable  remarks  re  the  perplexing  position  in  which  the  third  Carnot, 
“  Mrs.  W.  Mease,”  has  been  placed  by  such  eminent  experts  as  Messrs. 
Beckett  and  Wells  through  the  Belfast  dispute.  As  one  who  is  much 
interested  in  the  latest  addition  to  the  Carnot  family  I  beg  to  ask  your 
insertion  of  the  following  ; — 
Mrs.  W.  Mease  is  decidedly  a  very  soft  primrose  in  colour,  and,  as 
shown  at  Belfast,  does  not  admit  that  sulphur  yellow  should  be  applied  in 
the  description,  as  the  sulphur  of  commerce  and  canary  yellow  are  tjo 
much  alike. 
I  found  Yellow  Madame  Carnot,  as  grown  hy  myself,  to  be  decidedly 
canary  yellow,  inclining  to  buttery  yellow,  and  from  what  I  saw  of  it  as 
exhibited  by  other  growers  I  have  not  seen  any  deviation.  I  also  saw 
G.  J.  Warren  exhibited  at  Belfast  and  Edinburgh.  At  Belfast  it  wa.s 
exhibited  by  IMr.  W.  Wells,  in  juxtaposition  to  Mr.  K.  M'Kenna’s  first 
prize  stand  of  twenty-four  .Japanese,  which  contained  a  fairly  repre¬ 
sentative  bloom  of  “Yellow  Madame  Carnot,”  as  supplied  by  Mr.  H.  J. 
Jones,  and  although  Mr.  IMTvenna’s  bloom  was  the  deeper  yellow  in 
colour,  and  the  better  finished  and  better  built  bloom  of  the  two,  taking 
into  consideration  they  were  grown  under  different  cultural  conditions,  I 
do  not  consider  them  distinct. 
I  can  assure  Mr.  Haggart,  and  the  rank  and  file  of  Chrysanthemum 
growers,  that  they  need  not  fear  a  recurrence  of  disqualification  hy  using 
a  bloom  of  Mrs.  Mease  in  a  stand  with  G.  .1.  Warren  when  distinct 
varieties  are  required,  as  there  is  no  similarity  in  colouring  so  close  as 
Golden  Queen  of  England  and  Emily  Dale. 
Mr.  Mease  stated  verbally  at  the  October  show  of  the  N.C.S.  that  his 
primrose  sport  had  remained  perfectly  true,  and  was  quite  distinct  from 
G.  ,r.  Warren — syn.  Y^ellow  Madame  Carnot.  I  have  it  from  an  unim¬ 
peachable  authority  that  the  bloom  exhibited  by  Mr.  W.  Mease  in  his 
premier  stand  of  forty-eight  at  the  N.C.S.  Show  last  November,  and  to 
which  was  awarded  the  special  prize  as  the  best  Japanese  bloom  in  the 
show,  was  generally  and  popularly  accepted  as  the  third  Carnot,  so  that 
if  the  officiating  ,T udges  dispensed  their  awards  in  darkness  there  must 
have  been  some  considerable  period  of  daylight  while  this  show  was  in 
existence. 
If  my  opinion  is  of  any  interest  to  the  many  readers  of  the  Journal, 
I  have  much  pleasure  in  stating  that  I  unhesitatingly  ordered,  and  have 
been  supplied  with,  Mrs.  W.  Mease,  and  I  am  pleased  to  say  she  is  taking 
kindly  to  the  change,  and  promises  to  do  well. — Hugh  Crawford. 
I  AM  not  at  all  surprised  to  see  on  page  285  of  the  last  issue  of  the 
Journal  that  your  correspondent,  Mr.  Alex.  Haggart  is  “mystified”  re 
the  yellow  sport  of  Madame  Carnot  Chrysanthemum  bearing  the  names 
G.  .T.  Warren,  Yellow  Madame  Carnot,  and  Mrs.  iVIease  ;  but  why  there 
should  he  this  confusion  in  the  names  I  do  not  know,  for  it  is  a  generally 
accepted  fact  that  the  two  first  names  are  given  to  the  one  variety,  and 
therefore  the  term  Yellow  Madame  Carnot  should  be  dropped,  as  the  first 
name  was  certificated  by  the  Committee  of  the  N.C.S.  on  November  1st, 
1897,  and  previous  to  that  an  A.M.  was  given  it  by  the  K.H.S.  on 
October  26th,  1897,  on  each  occasion  as  G.  J.  Warren. 
I  would  now  ask.  Is  there  any  rule  to  prevent  a  plant  which  has  been 
certificated  by  either  or  both  of  the  alx)ve  Societies  under  a  certain 
name,  and  having  been  distributed  to  the  public  under  that  name,  having 
it  removed  and  another  name  substituted  for  it  by  persons  in  the  trade  ? 
If  there  is  no  protection  against  this,  if  the  system  of  altering  names  is 
persevered  in,  buyers  of  new  varieties  will  always  be  in  danger  of 
purchasing  one  variety  under  many  aliases. 
]\Ir.  H.  J.  Jones,  when  sending  out  his  Yellow  Madame  Carnot,  stated 
in  a  note  to  the  Journal  of  Horticulture  (see  page  4,  .January  7th,  1897) 
that  if  he  found  his  Yellow  Madame  Carnot, was  identical  with  G.  J. 
Warren  he  would  give  it  the  latter  name  ;  but  he  does  not  do  so,  for 
I  find  in  his  catalogue  of  the  present  season  he  still  adheres  to  “  Yellow 
Madame  Carnot.” 
Surely  such  an  expert  as  this  gentleman  is  in  the  Chrysanthemum 
world  should  use  his  best  endeavours  to  prevent  such  confusion  among 
the  names. 
With  regard  to  IMrs.  Mease  being  identical  with  G.  J.  Warren,  I  am 
unable  to  say  from  personal  knowledge.  I  only  know  it  was  in  Mr. 
Mease’s  grand  exhibit  at  the  Aquarium  Show,  and  was  there  named 
G.  .J.  Warren.  Another  season  will  remove  many  doubts  on  this  point, 
but  if  this  should  prove  to  be  identical  with  G.  J.  Warren  it  will  be 
interesting  to  know  under  which  name  the  painting  which  was  awarded 
to  it  as  the  premier  flower  in  the  show  will  bear. 
During  the  last  season  I  grew  eight  plants  of  G.  .J.  Warren.  These 
were  grown  side  by  side,  and  the  buds  were  selected  on  each  plant  so 
as  to  have  flowers  of  this  variety  for  as  long  a  period  as  possible.  The 
last  bloom  was  cut  as  late  as  the  first  week  in  March.  On  these  eight 
plants  there  were  scarcely  !  wo  flowers  of  the  same  shade  of  yellow,  as 
the  colour  varied  on  the  different  plants  from  a  deep  canary  to  a  pale 
primrose.  What,  I  would  ask,  was  the  cause  of  this  ?  Were  the  deeper 
colours  caused  by  the  plants  being  more  vigorous,  or  vice  versa  ?  I  should 
be  glad  of  the  opinion  on  this  point  of  greater  experts  than — 
G.  J.  Warren,  Balcomhe  Place. 
[If,  and  when,  it  is  admitted  by  competent  authorities  who  have  no 
interest  in  the  retention  of  a  particular  name,  that  two  plants  bearing 
different  names  are  identical,  then  according  to  the  universal  rule 
established  by  long  usage,  the  name  first  recognised,  and  under  which  the 
plant  was  certificated,  is  the  only  right  and  correct  one,  any  others  that 
may  be  attached  to  the  same  plant  being  usurpers.  Any  systematic 
infringement  of  that  intelligible  and  perfectly  reasonable  rule  w'ould  be 
calculated  to  lead  to  serious  confusion  and  disappointment  among 
purchasers  of  plants.  At  present  the  question  of  the  distinctness  or  otherwise 
of  the  Chrysanthemums  G.  J.  Warren  and  Yellow  Madame  Carnot  seems 
to  be  very  much  a  matter  of  trade  opinion.  If  the  point  is  not  settled 
before  the  autumn  shows,  there  will  evidently  be  grave  risks  of  disqualifi¬ 
cations  occurring.  Has  it  been  clearly  stated  when,  where,  and  with 
whom  the  yellow  variety  exhibited  by  Mr.  Jones,  under  the  name  of  Mrs. 
F.  A.  Bevan,  at  the  December  show  of  the  N.C.S.,  originated,  and  by  whom 
the  blooms  were  grown  ?  It  is  not  unusual  for  “  sports  ”  very  similar  in 
appearance  to  occur  in  different  localities  during  the  same  season.  The 
appearance  of  these  two  yellows  seems  to  be  a  case  in  point.  The  origin 
and  history  of  one  is  clear — G.  .J.  Warren  ;  and  it  is  difficult  to  imagine 
why  similar  information  should  not  be  forthcoming  in  respect  to  the  other. 
Kaisers  of  new  plants  are  generally  ready  to  supply  full  information 
respecting  them,  but  occasionally  the  matter  is  inadvertently  overlooked.] 
Seasonable  Notes  on  Chrysanthemums. 
All  who  are  anxious  to  have  high-class  Chrysanthemum  blooms  in 
November,  either  for  exhibition  or  home  use,  must  now  be  fully  prepared 
to  give  them  close  attention.  The  fine  blooms  we  see  during  the  autumn 
are  not  produced  in  two  or  three  months,  but  are  the  result  of  much  care 
from  now  onwards.  In  the  first  place  I  consider  it  of  the  utmost 
importance  that  the  cultivator,  he  he  large  or  small,  should  estimate  the 
number  of  plants  he  can  pay  attention  to  and  comfortably  house  when  the 
time  comes.  I  venture  to  say  more  collections  are  spoilt  through 
attempting  too  many  than  from  any  other  cause.  Overcrowding  at  all 
stages  is  a  serious  mistake. 
Having  decided  on  the  number  of  plants  to  grow,  another  important 
step  is  the  selection  of  varieties.  If  required  for  exhibition  no  one  can  do 
better  than  carefully  study  the  past  pages  of  the  Journal,  as  I  consider 
the  returns  sent  to  Mr.  Molyneux  by  most  of  the  leading  growers  and 
published  therein,  are  of  great  assistance  not  only  to  beginners,  but  to  all 
interested  in  the  cultivation  of  Chrysanthemums.  Fersonally  I  should 
much  prefer  if  each  contributor's  list  could  be  published  as  sent  in,  one 
would  then  have  the  benefit  of  the  most  successful  exhibitor’s  choice. 
Another  grave  mistake  made  by  many  growers  is  attempting  too  many 
