326 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
April  14,  18t»8. 
Chrysanthemum  G.  J.  Warren. 
I  NOTICE,  on  page  308,  that  some  doubt  has  been  expressed  as  to  this 
variety  proving  satisfactory.  Having  seen  reports  on  its  first  appearance 
in  the  Journal  of  Horticulture  at  the  end  of  1896,  I  ordered  one  plant,  and 
have  great  pleasure  in  stating  that  it  succeeded  beyond  my  expectations, 
considering  it  was  the  first  year  of  distribution.  My  plant  produced 
three  good  flowers,  which  were  exhibited  in  the  famous  .Jubilee  compe¬ 
tition  at  Edinburgh,  and  one  of  them  was  fit  to  rank  in  any  stand  of 
Chrysanthemums  that  I  have  yet  seen.  Doubtless  these  flowers  were 
seen  at  Edinburgh  by  many  Chrysanthemum  growers.  I  have  every 
confidence  in  the  variety,  and  am  growing  twelve  plants  for  exhibition 
blooms  this  season,  which  is  a  large  number  considering  the  small  amount 
of  glass  available  here  for  Chrysanthemums,  and  there  is  only  one  other 
variety — Madame  Carnot — -which  is  similarly  favoured  by  me.  The  colour 
of  G.  .7.  Warren  is  best  described  as  canary  yellow,  and  in  habit  of 
growth  it  is  the  exact  counterpart  of  its  parent.  Both  Mr.  Warren,  the 
raiser,  and  Mr.  Wells,  the  distributor,  are  to  be  congratulated  on  this 
splendid  acquisition  which  they  have  given  us. — W.  II.  DiVERB,  Belvoir 
Castle  Cardens,  Grantham. 
The  “  Carnot  ”  Mystery. 
I  QUITE  agree  with  Mr.  Haggart  (page  285)  that  some  elucidation 
of  this  subject  is  desirable  in  the  interest  of  intending  cultivators,  and 
especially  exhibitors  of  Chrysanthemums.  I  have  never  experienced  the 
misfortune  of  disqualification,  like  Mr.  Haggart,  but  have  many  times 
been  compelled  to  write  the  distasteful  word  on  the  entry  card,  and  often 
with  regret,  as  I  have  much  sympathy  with  young  showmen  who  have 
been  misled  into  a  position  of  false  security. 
In  the  majority  of  instances  the  exhibitor  has  had  to  pay  the  penalty 
which  he  unfortunately  incurred  through  following  too  closely  the  cla,ssi- 
fication  of  certain  varieties  by  Chrysanthemum  vendors.  Many  times  I 
have  gleaned  this  as  the  cause  when  in  conversation  with  the  victimised 
exhibitor,  who  almost  invariably  remarks,  “  I  thought  this  was  quite 
right,  Mr.  So-and-so  classes  it  as  such  and  such.”  Very  often  I  have 
replied,  “  What  a  pity  you  did  not  consult  the  N.C.S.  catalogue,  which  is 
the  generally  acknowledged  guide  in  cases  of  nomenclature.  This  is  an 
authority,  whereas  Mr.  So-and-so’s  catalogue  is  but  the  opinion  of  an 
individual.”  Too  frequently,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  the  reply  comes,  “  Why, 
I  did  not  know  there  was  a  N.C.S.  catalogue  !  ”  The  ignorance  of  the 
existence  of  such  a  guide  has  surprised  me  many  times,  especially  knowing 
as  I  do  that  Chrysanthemum  exhibitors  as  a  rule  read  attentively.  This 
is,  however,  somewhat  of  a  digression,  and  I  return  to  the  “mystery.” 
It  is  an  unfortunate  circumstance  when  varieties  which  are  identical, 
or  as  nearly  so  as  possible,  receive  distinct  names.  For  this  there  can 
only  be  one  reason,  which  is  all  too  obvious.  Upon  matters  of  nomen¬ 
clature  in  Chrysanthemums  I  have  fixed  opinions,  as  several  of  my  friends 
know,  though  some  of  my  views  may  seem  to  them  a  little  pedantic.  In 
the  long  run  I  am  convinced  they  will  not  be  found  so,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  point  in  a  severely  practical  direction. 
One  of  my  contentions  is  that  a  new  variety,  be  it  a  sport  or  other¬ 
wise,  should  retain  the  name  with  which  it  was  originally  invested,  and 
any  sport  ot  a  similar  nature  appearing  subsequently  in  any  other  part 
of  the  country,  or  subsequently  exhibited,  should  receive  no  other  than 
the  same  original  name.  This  would  prevent  confusion,  wasteful 
expenditure,  and  disappointment.  If  this  is  not  a  practical  view  I 
should  like  to  know  what  is.  The  sport  from  Prince  Alfred,  named  Lord 
Wolseley,  occurred  in  two  distinct  places  the  same  year,  but  there  was 
only  one  distinct  variety,  not  two,  and  the  only  rightful  name  for  both 
was  that  first  given — Lord  Wolseley. 
In  the  question  raised  by  Mr.  Haggart,  in  my  opinion  a  long  stretch 
of  imagination  is  re(iuired  to  distinguish  the  difference  between  G.  .7. 
Warren  and  Yellow  Madame  Carnot.  Mr.  Wells  procured  and  exhibited 
G.  J.  Warren  in  1896.  To  be  accurate,  it  sported  in  the  gardens  at 
Balcombe  Place,  near  Brighton,  and  received  its  name  in  compliment  to 
the  gardener  there. 
I  have  had  ample  opportunity  of  comparing  G.  .7.  Warren  and  its 
co-sport  Mrs.  W.  Mease  ;  having  seen  large  and  small  blooms  of  both 
under  various  circumstances,  I  have  no  hesitation  whatever  in  saying 
they  are  quite  distinct.  At  the  end  of  November  last  I  had  examples 
of  both  before  me  every  day,  for  at  least  a  fortnight,  for  the  express 
purpose  of  notifying  any  change  of  colour,  should  there  be  any,  while 
the  blooms  were  passing  through  the  various  stages  of  development  and 
decay.  As  is  customary  with  all  flowers,  the  colour  in  both  faded  some¬ 
what,  but  it  was  proportionate. 
G.  J.  Warren  is  yellow  in  colour.  Many  catalogues  describe  it  as 
canary  yellow.  I  am  not  sure  this  is  the  right  description,  as  there  are 
both  pale  and  deep  shades  of  colour  in  canaries.  I  am  more  inclined  to 
say  that  the  colour  is  yellow,  inclining  to  golden  yellow. 
Mrs.  W.  Mease  is  a  pale  or  soft  shade  of  primrose.  The  bloom  of 
this  variety  that  secured  for  Mrs.  Mease  the  premier  distinction  in  the 
.la])anese  section  at  the  N.C.S.  November  exhibition,  was  a  distinctly 
typical  one.  Some  of  the  best  coloured  blooms  of  G.  J.  Warren  that 
I  have  come  across  were  staged  at  the  l^dinburgh  Show  last  November. 
That  they  were  thoroughly  distinct  from  kirs.  Mease  there  cannot  be 
one  single  doubt. 
I  fail  to  see  any  difference  between  G.  .7.  Warren  and  Y'ellow  Carnot. 
This  family,  like  many  other  types  of  Chrysanthemums,  both  Japanese 
and  incurved,  bids  fair  to  become  a  large  one.  The  latest  addition  to  the 
“  Carnot  ”  group  is  a  pink  form,  which  I  am  hoping  to  test  during  the  current 
season.  If  this  addition  to  a  deservedly  popular  family  possesses,  as  I 
hear  it  does,  all  the  charming  characteristics  of  its  parent,  it  will  be  a 
distinct  gain  to  the  Chrysanthemum  world,  as  it  is  most  difficult  to 
conceive  a  more  elegant  type  of  a  .Japanese  Chrysanthemum  than  the 
original  Madame  Carnot,  sent  out  by  that  enterprising  and  successful 
raiser,  Mons.  Calvat. — Edwin  Molyneux. 
[Our  experienced  correspondent’s  views  on  nomenclature  are  indubit¬ 
ably  sound.  They  are  in  accord  with  the  recognised  practice  of  botanists 
all  over  the  world.  The  first  name  of  a  plant,  unless  it  is  proved  to  be 
scientifically  wrong,  has  priority  over  all  others.  If  this  principle  were 
formally  ratified  by  the  N.C.S.,  good  service  would  be  done  to  the  great 
community  of  Chrysanthemum  purchasers  and  exhibitors.  At  present  the 
weight  of  evidence  is  decidedly  in  favour  of  the  distinctness  of  G.  .7. 
Warren  and  Mrs.  Mease,  but  not  of  the  distinctness  of  G.  J.  Warren  and 
Yellow  Madame  Carnot.  It  may  be  expected  that  the  exact  origin  of  the 
last  named  will  be  made  clear  by  persons  who  are  in'imately  acquainted 
with  the  facts  of  the  case.  Records  of  the  origin  of  sports  are  always 
interesting,  and  may  be  important.] 
TROP7EOLUM  JARRATTI  IN  BASKETS. 
Among  exquisite  plants  which  springtime  brings  to  perfection  in 
our  cooler  structures  for  floral  display  is  this  lovely  little  Tropaeolum. 
It  should  be  grown  by  every  plant  lover,  and  those  who  do  not  yet  know 
it,  although  it  is  an  old  introduction,  should  inquire  of  their  friends  to  be 
allowed  to  see  its  charms  during  the  present  month,  when  it  is  at  its  best. 
I  do  not  think  I  venture  too  far  in  my  praise  of  this  plant  in  anticipating 
that  everyone  who  sees  it  for  the  first  time  in  its  best  condition  will  desire 
to  have  it  in  his  greenhouse  next  season. 
Growing  this  plant  is  simplicity  itself.  The  fine  tendrils  are  the  only 
difficulty,  as  they  grow  rapidly,  and  must  in  their  progress  be  kept  under 
control  and  fixed  as  they  extend.  The  dry  tubers,  of  the  size  of  a 
Chestnut,  should  be  placed  singly  in  large  60’s  early  in  August  in  peat 
and  silver  sand  as  soon  as  the  fragile  fresh  tendril  becomes  observable  in 
the  flowering  pot  ot  the  previous  season,  where  it  has  been  left  quite  dry 
from  finishing  flowering  in  the  spring.  The  tubers  should  be  barely 
covered,  and  the  tendril  left  quite  exposed. 
To  any  ordinary  wire  trellis  of  balloon  or  other  shape  I  have  given 
preference  by  transferring  the  plants  from  their  quarters  in  fiO’s  to  wire 
baskets  suspended  7  feet  high  across  the  passage  round  the  greenhouse. 
The  baskets  are  lined  with  moss,  supplying  as  much  soil  as  the  former 
can  fairly  take.  The  object  is  thus  gained,  after  training  the  lead  to  the 
lowest  point  of  the  basket,  to  be  able  to  wind  it  round  its  curving  sides, 
and  gradually  round  its  widest  circumference. 
Watering  must  be  done  sparingly  until  growth  becomes  relatively 
rampant.  The  amount  of  flowering  on  the  greater  part  of  the  entire 
length  of  the  tendrils  depends  on  a  very  light  and  airy  position,  where 
they  represent  a  dream  of  beauty  for  about  a  month. —  H.  H.  R.,  Forest 
Hill. 
ANEMONES  AND  RANUNCULUSES. 
These  two  flowers,  which  have'  both  been  great  favourites  in  our 
gardens  for  ages  past,  belong  to  the  same  natural  order — Ranunculacem, 
of  which  the  common  yellow  Crowfoot  of  our  fields  is  the  type  and 
representative.  The  garden  Ranunculus  came  originally  from  the  milder 
climates  of  lands  bordering  on  the  Mediterranean,  but  has  now  been 
cultivated  in  this  country  for  the  last  three  centuries.  Gerarde  reared 
them,  as  he  tells  us,  in  1594  ;  Parkinson  in  1629  enumerates  eight 
varieties  ;  and  Ray,  forty  years  later  on,  increased  the  list  to  twenty-five. 
It  was  not,  however,  till  the  middle  of  the  last  century  that  the  Ranun¬ 
culus,  like  some  other  flowers,  reached  the  height  of  popularity,  and 
became  in  great  demand.  Then  numbers  of  new  sorts  were  reared,  and 
florists,  we  are  told,  became  absolute  idolaters  of  the  beauty  and  variety 
of  their  colouring. 
The  Anemone  is  a  native  of  the  same  parts  as  the  Ranunculus,  and 
was  introduced  to  England  from  Italy  towards  the  close  of  the  sixteenth 
century.  Like  many  other  plants  in  its  wild  state,  it  has  its  flowers 
single  ;  but  the  corolla  can  he  multiplied  almost  indefinitely  by  the 
conversion  of  its  stamens  and  pistils  into  petals  under  judicious  culture. 
The  Anemone  takes  its  name  from  a  Greek  word  signifying  wind  flower, 
an  appellation  actually  bestowed  upon  it  by  our  forefathers,  from  the 
circumstance  of  its  growing  naturally  in  open  plains  or  exposed  situations, 
where  its  feathery  grains  produce  a  singular  shining  appearance  when 
waved  by  the  breeze. 
Wheji  first  introduced  there  were  only  a  few  species,  but  since  then* 
Art  has  so  increased  the  varieties  of  this  light  and  graceful  favourite,  that 
florists  have  long  since  ceased  to  attempt  to  distinguish  them  by  individual 
names.  The  colours,  both  of  the  Ranunculus  and  the  Anemone,  are  clear, 
rich,  and  brilliant,  imrtaking  of  almost  every  hue,  and  are  either  in  single 
uniform  tints,  or  mottled  with  stripes  and  patches.  —  Wm.  Norman 
Brown. 
