JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
September  10,  1898. 
managed,  to  play  two  tunes  (one  was  “  Grod  Save  the  Queen  ”  the 
other  wasn’t).  He  was  certainly  not  a  born  musician,  so 
endeavoured  to  be  a  made  one.  As  for  gardening — well,  he  spelt 
Geranium  with  a  “J"  (a  little  one,  too).  Where  he  is  now  I 
know  not,  but  dare  assert  that  he  is  not  conducting  an  orchestra, 
to  which  hii  aspirations  seemed  to  tend.  Another,  a  really  clever 
lad,  devoted  much  spare  time  to  the  whittling  out  of  puzzle  money 
boxes,  but  I  question  whether  his  remuneration  as  a  gardener  has 
filled  them.  All  harmless  amusement,  but  misdirected  energy. 
Aware,  as  I  am,  that  there  are  now  many  incentives  to  keep  a 
lad  in  the  right  course,  which  did  not  exist  during  my  probationary 
term,  there  are  still  very  many  places — gardens — which  are  isolated 
— shut  off  from  the  benefits  of  mutual  improvement  societies  which 
have  sprung  up.  1  should  like  to  see  all  bothies,  even  those  in  the 
more  remote  parts  of  the  kingdom,  brought  in  touch  by  this  or 
similar  means.  Essay  writing  is,  I  believe,  of  the  highest  practical 
value  to  a  young  student,  being  an  important  means  of  developing 
and  strengthening  the  mind.  Like  many  other  things,  the  best 
results  are  attained  by  the  stimulus  of  competition,  a  competition 
which  many  bright  young  minds  are  precluded  from  entering  upon, 
except  such  at  is  provided  by  their  limited  local  area,  which  may 
be  to  limited  as  to  be  useless.  I  do  not  doubt  but  that  in  the 
course  of  time  and  progress  of  education  we  shall  have  from  the 
’prentis  hands  of  our  young  penmen  articlet  finding,  their  way  into 
the  pages  of  our  gardening  periodicals.  The  possibility  is  pre¬ 
sented  to  my  mind  of  bothydom  eventually  having  a  corner  to 
itself  ;  and  perhaps  it  it  not  till  then  that  we  shall  see  it  properly 
represented,  for  it  must  be  obvious  that  its  subjects  are  at  present 
handicapped  amongst  fleet-fingered  contributors,  and  consequently 
diffident  to  enter  the  lists. 
The  importance  of  this  little  kingdom  of  bothydom  in  the 
gardening  world  cannot  fail  to  be  acknowledged,  and  that  import¬ 
ance  appears  to  meali-sufficient  to  warrant  its  having  a  journal  of 
its  own.  Moreover,  that  if  such  a  journal,  say  a  monthly  one,  were 
launched  it  would  be  welcomed  in  every  bothy  and  by  every 
bothyite  in  the  kingdom.  I  think  our  Editors  are  far  too  liberal 
minded  to  think  that  such  a  scheme  (however  visionary  it  may 
appear)  is  one  that  would  clash  with  the  claims  and  interests  of 
existing  horticultural  literature.  I  would  even  go  so  far  as  to  say 
that  “  the  bothy  journal  ”  would  rather  increase  than  decrease  the 
interest  which  I  hope  is  taken  in  the  gardening  papers  on  their 
weekly  visit  to  the  bothy  ;  these  should,  in  fact,  “  allure  to  brighter 
worlds  and  lead  the  way.” 
I  hope  that  there  is  not  a  bothy  existing  in  which  a  gardening 
paper  does  not  find  its  way,  though  that  way  may  be  viil  the 
gardener’s  house  after  its  perusal  there.  In  one  bothy,  as  a  junior, 
I  used  to  look  longingly  at  the  gardening  paper  as  it  laid  on  “  the 
gaffer’s  ”  desk  when  sent  to  sweep  out  bis  office.  That  was  all  I 
saw  of  it,  but  there  was  a  rumour  current  that  he — “  the  gaffer  ” — 
now  and  again  contributed  to  its  pages.  That,  I  suppose,  increased 
the  longing  which  was  unfulfilled.  But  times  are  changed  ;  wages 
are  higher,  and  papers  are  cheaper,  and  there  is  now  often  to  be 
•een  an  exchange  of  papers  between  the  bothy  and  the  gardener’s 
house  to  their  mutual  advantage. — An  Old  Boy. 
(To  be  continued.) 
ID 
Chkysanthemums  at  Steathfieldsaye. 
In  a  short  note  respecting  these  in  last  week’s  issue  I  ana,  through 
a  typographical  error,  made  to  say  the  plants  stood  in  rows  of  from 
Uoenty  to  a  hundred.  It  should  have  read  from  ninety  to  a  hundred, 
—A.  D. 
Mons.  Calvat’s  Jubilee  Vakieties. 
Mr.  B.  Molyneux  asks  on  page  224  how  Baron  Ad.  de  Eothschild 
is  behaving  himself .  Well,  with  me  the  Baron  is  quite  equal  to  any 
of  the  set,  having  good  foliage  to  within  3  inches  of  the  pots,  and  well 
ripened  wood.  Eere  d’Or  is  the  worst  with  me,  but,  as  “E.  M.”  says, 
there  are  thirty  out  of  the  thirty-four  varieties  which  are  of  good  dwarf 
habit,  but  what  the  blooms  will  be  remains  to  be  seen.  They  certainly 
look  better  than  I  have  ever  had  them  before  as  regards  the  wood  and 
buds  taken.  1  am  growing  Calvat’s  A.  Gold  all  ways,  and  the  habit  is 
all  that  one  can  wish  ;  not  coarse,  but  clean  and  free.  Mons.  Chenon 
de  Lech4,  of  last  year’s  set,  is  grand  in  habit  ;  if  this  is  not  seen  good 
I  shall  be  mistaken. — W.  Wells. 
Chrysanthemums  Uf  to  Date— New  Zealand  Election  for  18%. 
Through  the  goodness  of  the  Editor,  I  have  again  the  pleasure  of 
placing  before  the  public  the  results  of  an  election  of  the  most  approved 
thirty-aix  varieties  of  Japanese  '•  mums  ”  suitable  for  exhibition.  The 
election  of  last  year,  though  limited  to  the  Auckland  district,  met  with 
much  favour,  and  was  spoken  of  generally  by  nurserymen  as  well  as 
large  and  small  growers  from  all  parts  of  the  colony,  as  being  very 
serviceable.  To  enlarge  the  scope  of  the  election  and  to  make  it  still 
more  useful,  circulars  were  this  year  sent  inviting  the  cc-operation  of 
the  principal  “  mum  ”  growers  of  the  colony. 
Nearly  every  circular  brought  a  ready  and  cheerful  response,  and  in 
due  course  twenty-four  voters  sent  in  their  papers  complete.  These 
were  contributed  from  various  localities  as  follows — viz.,  Auckland,  5  j. 
Cambridge,  4  ;  Napier,  3  ;  Wellington,  2  ;  Christchurch,  5  ;  Nelson,  2 
whilst  Dunedin,  Oamaru,  and  Timaru  sent  one  each.  The  question  sub¬ 
mitted  to  the  voters  was  ;  “  Name  in  their  order  of  merit  the  best  thirty- 
six  varieties  of  Japanese  Chrysanthemums  for  exhibition,  assuming  the 
season  to  range  from  the  15th  April  to  7th  May.”  They  were  specially 
requested  to  use  their  own  experience  in  voting  in  preference  to  hearsay 
evidence,  however  good.  Further,  they  were  informed  that  the  variety 
placed  at  the  top  of  each  list  would  in  the  general  compilation  be 
awarded  thirty-six  marks,  and  each  variety  on  the  list  one  mark  less 
down  to  the  last  named,  which  would  thus  receive  only  one  mark. 
Nearly  all  the  lists  showed  evidence  of  the  expert  fitness  of  their  com¬ 
pilers,  and  all  showed  an  intelligent  desire  to  make  complete  and 
serviceable  returns.  As  might  have  been  expected  from  voters  whose 
locations  are  dotted  from  north  to  south  of  the  colony,  there  is  a  wide- 
range  of  opinion  as  to  what  constitutes  the  best  thirty-six  Japanese  for 
exhilition,  and  the  lists  of  these  twenty-four  voters  contained  no  less 
than  162  varieties. 
The  Journal  of  Horticulture  of  20th  February  last  gives  Mr.  Edwin 
Molyneux’s  compilation  of  the  best  fifty  Japs  for  exhibition  from  fifty 
voters,  who  amongst  them  named  258  varieties,  so  that  the  peculiarities 
of  our  British  brethren  in  this  particular  are  relatively  nearly  equal  to 
our  own. 
The  difference  in  the  dates  upon  which  the  shows  must  be  held  in  the 
chief  centres  of  population,  consequent  upon  the  great  variation  of  our 
climate  from  north  to  south  (there  is  nearly  four  weeks’  difference 
between  Auckland  and  Dunedin  in  the  date  on  which  “  mums  ”  will 
mature)  accounts  for  much  of  this,  and  that  many  new  varieties  imported 
in  certain  parts  of  the  colony  take  a  season  to  get  generally  distributed, 
together  with  the  New  Zealand  seedlings  raised  principally  in  Wellington 
and  Nelson,  accounts  for  much  more. 
My  remarks  upon  the  selection  must  necessarily  be  brief.  The  thirty- 
six  that  come  out  top  are  splendid,  and  a  credit  to  the  selectors.  Viviand 
Morel  and  its  sport,  Charles  Davis,  still  hold  first  place,  but  I  predict 
that  on  their  becoming  better  known  Mutual  Friend  and  Madame  Carnot, 
undoubtedly  two  of  the  best  whites  in  the  colony,  will  run  them  very 
hard  for  first  place  another  year ;  and  of  all  the  coloured  varieties 
Viscountess  Hambledon  and  Golden  Gate  rank  with,  or  at  least  next  to, 
the  four  above  mentioned.  I  am  somewhat  surprised  (the  variety  not 
being  new)  to  find  Mrs.  B.  D.  Adams  so  far  down  in  the  list  ;  it  is  a  good 
grower,  gives  blooms  11^  inches  across,  is  full  to  the  centre,  has  long 
curly  florets,  and  ia  thus  the  lean  ideal  of  an  exhibition  “  mum.”  Of 
the  new  varieties  not  finding  a  ,p]ace  in  the  first  thirty-six,  but  highly 
placed  by  all  who  grew  them,  may  be  mentioned  Mrs.  C.  E.  Shea,  Mrs. 
W.  H.  Lees,  Thos.  Wilkins,  Jennie  Falconer,  Her  Majesty,  E.  Daille- 
douze,  E.  Baldwin.  All  these  are  of  the  first  order  of  merit,  and  should 
be  in  every  good  collection. 
A  few  words  in  explanation  of  my  list,  its  figures  and  their  intended 
purpose.  The  figures  to  the  left  of  the  name  show  its  position  in  tho 
voting,  those  in  the  first  column  to  the  right  the  number  of  voters  who 
voted  for  it,  and  those  in  the  second  column  to  the  right  the  number  of 
marks  they  awarded  it.  The  piimary  object  of  such  audits  is  a  tabu¬ 
lated  list  to  show  the  estimation  in  which  the  several  varieties  are  held 
by  those  who  grow  them,  and  this  is  not  attained  when  the  number  of 
voters  only  is  recorded.  A  reference  to  the  audit  will  show  this  clearly, 
for  if  made  up  by  votes — ie.,  one  voter  one  vote— five  of  those  now  in 
the  first  thirty-six  would  fail  to  gain  a  place  there,  and  every  variety 
but  the  one  at  the  top  would  change  positions  ;  but  by  the  system  of 
valuation  by  marks  as  above,  each  voter  places  a  relative  value  upon 
each  variety,  and  so  records  their  worth. 
For  illustration,  take  No.  51,  Mrs.  C.  E.  Shea.  This  was  grown  by 
only  three  voters,  but  they  allowed  it  39  marks — i.e.,  nearly  30  marks 
each  (the  voting  was  35,  32,  and  22  marks).  This  goes  to  show  that 
they  all  thought  it  a  very  high-class  new  variety.  On  the  other  hand 
take  No.  57,  Mrs.  Leslie  Ward,  which  got  10  votes,  but  only  72  marks — 
i.«.,  say  7  marks  each.  This  variety  has  been  two  years  in  the  colony, 
and  was  probably  known  to  twenty  out  of  the  twenty-four  growers  who 
contributed  to  the  audit,  and  yet  only  ten  included  it  in  their  lists,  and 
all  these  put  it  near  the  bottom.  Clearly  then  this  variety,  though  good, 
is  not  of  the  first  order  of  merit,  and  yet  under  the  one  voter  one  vote 
system  ii  would  have  stood  No.  29  in  the  best  thirty -six,  to  the  exclusion 
of  a  better  variety.  A  careful  analysis  of  the  votes  and  marks  will  well 
repay  those  who  refer  to  this  audit  when  making  or  amending  their 
collections.  Never  in  any  one  year  in  the  history  of  “mum”  growing 
has  there  been  such  a  number  of  new  varieties  imported  into  the  colony 
as  during  the  past  year — very  many  of  them  are  amongst  the  best  in  the 
world,  and  the  chief  use  of  such  an  audit  as  this  is  by  publicly  recordirg. 
our  experiences  to  bring  such  prominently  to  the  front,  and  warn 
growers  to  be  wary,  and  not  to  waste  their  time  and  attention  on  second- 
class  varieties. 
In  conclusion,  I  beg  to  tender  my  thanks  to  our  Secretary,  Mr. 
McDermott,  and  to  the  Chrysanthemum  growers  of  the  Colony  whose 
