December  3,  1896. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
535 
are,  it  is  trae,  some  Rose  growers  who  despise  all  labels,  and  haring  a 
retentive  memory  are  able  to  recollect  where  they  plant  their  Roses,  or 
can  distinguish  them  either  by  their  foliage  or  flowers.  Having  had  so 
many  favourites  in  the  garden  my  attention  has  been  divided  amongst 
them,  so  I  do  not  profess  to  be  able  to  do  this,  and  moreover  my 
impaired  sight  prevents  me  from  that  active  discrimination  which  is 
necessary  in  such  a  case. 
Labelling  has  always  been  a  point  on  which  I  have  been  particular. 
People  come  to  look  at  your  Rose  garden,  and  are  sure  to  pounce  on 
some  unnamed  plant,  if  you  have  such,  and  ask  “  What  is  that  Rose  ?  ” 
not  that  it  makes  the  slightest  difference  to  them,  as  they  will  probably 
forget  it  the  next  minute.  I  have,  therefore,  used  various  methods  of 
labelling.  Wooden  labels,  unless  they  are  the  huge  ones  used  by  nursery¬ 
men,  are  a  never-ending  vexation.  They  decay  or  are  pulled  up,  or 
drawn  out  of  the  ground  by  frost,  and  so  become  useless.  I  have  tried 
for  many  years  zinc  labels,  on  which  the  name  is  written  with  indelible 
ink,  and  then  suspended  on  a  zinc  peg. 
Preferable  to  this  is,  however,  the  acme  label.  No  one  who  has  ever 
used  them  will,  I  think,  care  for  any  other  ;  and  Mr.  Pinches  has  lately 
made  an  improvement,  which  makes  them  absolutely  perfect.  They  are 
now  made  with  two  uprights,  which  fix  the  label  so  that  it  is  kept  in  a 
horizontal  position  in  front  of  the  observer.  This  plan  was  originally 
adopted  for  Rhododendrons,  but  Mr.  Pinches  found  they  were  so  much 
inquired  after  for  Roses  that  he  has  arranged  to  have  all  the  leading 
varieties  ready  for  use  in  this  manner. 
The  Craze  for  Bio  ThinDs. 
The  size  of  the  stands  of  huge  Chrysanthemums  is  not  one  that  fills 
me  with  intense  admiration,  and  I  suppose  I  shall  be  considered  a 
heretic  if  I  say  it  is  only  one  indication  of  the  vulgar  taste  which  has 
crept  into  all  branches  of  horticulture,  for  the  loss  in  the  case  of  flowers 
of  elegance  and  beauty,  and  in  that  of  vegetables  of  excellence  and 
flavour.  I  call  it  vulgar,  because  size  is  so  much  associated  in  the 
minds  of  half-educated  people  with  excellence.  The  negro  on  the  West 
Coast  of  Africa  can  never  believe  that  a  little  man  is  worth  anything, 
and  intense  was  the  disgust  of  the  Christian  natives  of  Sierra  Leone 
when  a  thoroughly  good  man,  but  very  diminutive  in  stature,  went  out 
as  their  bishop.  “  That  cannot  be  our  big  father  1  ”  was  the  cry  of 
disappointment  which  greeted  his  landing.  I  look  back  on  the  Chrys¬ 
anthemum  that  used  to  be  exhibited  a  few  years  ago,  and  I  must 
confess  that  in  an  aesthetic  point  of  view  they  were  to  me  preferable  to 
many  of  those  monstrous  mops  that  we  see  nowadays. 
It  is  the  same  way  with  vegetables.  The  enormous  Brussels  Sprouts 
so  dearly  beloved  by  exhibitors  are  coarse  as  compared  with  those  which 
we  used  formerly  to  grow.  We  get  enormous  Onions,  but  the  pungent 
flavour  has  been  eliminated  from  them.  It  is  all  very  well  to  the 
cottager  to  whom  quantity  rather  than  quality  is  what  is  sought  for,  and 
who  will  rejoice  in  a  Cauliflower  that  weighs  12  lbs.  or  a  Potato  that 
weighs  3^  lbs.,  as  was  the  case  here  recently,  but  those  whose  palates 
are  a  little  more  educated  eschew  such  monstrosities. 
I  have,  however,  good  authority  on  my  side.  The  R.H.S,  has  issued 
a  set  of  rules  for  judging,  and  a  broad  distinction  is  made  between  the 
products  of  the  cottager’s  garden  and  those  of  a  gentleman’s.  Of  course, 
I  despair  of  seeing  any  change  with  regard  to  Chrysanthemums,  except 
it  be  in  the  production  of  larger  mops  than  those  which  we  at  present 
have.  At  present  the  Rose  has  been  exempted  from  these  aitempts  at 
size  ;  where  they  have  been  produced  they  are  in  no  great  favour.  Such 
Roses  as  Paul  Neyron  and  Antoine  Mouton  are  but  seldom  seen.  I  for 
one  think  Ulrich  Brunner  too  large,  and  as  a  general  rule  our  new  Roses 
are  devoid  of  that  coarseness  which  seems  almost  inseparable  from  size. 
— D.,  Deal. 
THE  GARDENERS’  ROYAL  BENEVOLENT  AND 
“THE  HORTICULTURAL  DIRECTORY.” 
Some  little  time  ago  it  occurred  to  me  when  perusing  that  useful 
book  “  The  Horticultural  Directory,”  that  it  could  be  the  means  of 
affording  a  little  help  to  that  valua^e  institution,  the  Gardeners'  Royal 
Benevolent.  1  was  rather  astonished  to  find  what  a  number  of  gardeners 
names  and  addresses  there  were  in  one  book  ;  there  are  no  less  than 
5200.  As  we  all  know,  this  is  done  free  of  charge,  as  is  usual  in  such 
works,  still  I  think  something  might  be  done  towards  helping  the 
Gardeners’  Benevolent  if  a  small  charge  was  made  for  that  purpose. 
The  coming  year  being  so  important  as  regards  Her  Gracious 
Majesty’s  sixtieth  year  of  reigning,  a  commencement  might  be  made  to 
commemorate  such  by  sending  a  printed  circular  to  all  names  found  in 
the  “  Directory,”  asking  them  to  subscribe  Is.  for  the  1898  insertion, 
this  to  cover  three  years  ;  then  make  another  request  every  three  years. 
Gardeners  failing  to  subscribe  not  to  have  their  names  inserted.  Of 
coarse  there  will  be  small  amount  of  expense  for  stamps  (halfpenny) 
and  printing,  still,  if  heartily  responded  to,  there  would  be  a  good  sum 
to  hand  over  to  the  Society  ;  and  I  for  one  feel  quite  sure  no  gardener 
who  has  his  heart  in  the  right  place  could  possibly  object,  on  receipt 
of  the  circular,  to  forward  the  shilling  postal  order,  but  feel  glad  to 
have  the  opportunity  of  helping  the  Society,  without  practically  any 
loss  to  himself. — A.  J.  Long,  Head  Gardener,  Wyfold  Court, 
[This  is  a  question  for  the  active  Secretary  of  the  Institution  to 
consider,  and  while  the  more  shillings  he  might  collect  the  better  we 
should  be  pleased,  we  cannot  exercise  any  coercion  in  the  matter.  This 
would  be  offensive  to  the  generously  disposed,  and  calculated  to  do 
more  harm  than  good,  as  coercion  is  often  the  parent  of  revulsion.] 
HOME  OF  HORTICULTURE. 
My  letters  upon  the  above  have  not  passed  unnoticed.  They  have 
been  commented  upon  in  your  columns,  and  I  have  received  numerous 
replies,  all  admitting  the  desirability  for  the  establishment  of  a  Home  of 
Horticulture,  but  no  one  has  made  any  suggestion  as  to  the  ways  and 
means  for  its  accomplishment.  I  have  given  considerable  thought  to 
this  subject,  and  am  persuaded  that  with  united  effort  a  home  for  horti¬ 
culture  may  be  found. 
Time  is  of  value,  and  none  should  be  lost.  To  make  a  move  in  this 
matter,  I  would  venture  to  submit  a  plan  for  the  proposed  building  and 
a  scheme  for  providing  the  necessary  funds;  The  selection  of  the  most 
suitable  site  is  of  great  importance,  and  I  would  therefore  suggest  that 
a  meeting  should  be  convened  at  an  early  date  for  this  purpose.  With 
your  permission,  I  propose  very  shortly  to  put  this  scheme  before  your 
readers,  so  that  they  may  have  a  comprehensive  view  of  its  details.  I 
trust  I  may  count  upon  your  kind  co-operation. — James  L.  Wood, 
Oaldeigli  ParU,  Whetstone, 
[We  suspect  the  public  awaits  the  issue  of  Mr.  Wood’s  scheme  ;  his 
communications  are  scarcely  of  a  nature  to  invite  suggestions.] 
FRUIT  JUDGING  AT  YORK  SHOW. 
I  THINK  Mr,  Riddell  is  quite  right  in  bringing  to  the  notice  of 
the  public  the  action  of  the  fruit  Judges  in  disqualifying  his  collection 
of  dessert  fruit  at  the  above  show.  It  is  a  nice  point  indeed  to  decide 
where  dessert  Apples  end  and  culinary  varieties  begin.  May  I  suggest 
to  the  parties  concerned  that  they  state  a  case  for  the  Council  of  the 
Royal  Horticultural  Society  to  adjudicate  upon,  and  that  the  said 
Council’s  decision  be  accepted  as  final  ?  This  is  in  accordance  with 
Rule  12,  page  7,  in  the  Rules  for  Judging,  published  by  the  R.H.S. — 
J.  McIndoe, 
I  AM  sorry  to  see  that  my  old  friend  Mr.  Riddell  is  breathing  forth 
his  anathemas  upon  the  heads  of  the  unfortunate  Judges  at  York  for 
simply  doing  their  duty.  We  fully  expected  that  our  decisions  would 
be  severely  and  even  adversely  criticised  by  defeated  and  disappointed 
exhibitors ;  but  we  have,  on  the  other  hand,  received  many  assurances 
that  the  great  majority  of  independent  and  fully  competent  critics 
agreed  in  nearly  every  case  with  our  decisions,  and  more  especially  so  in 
the  case  referred  to  by  Mr.  Riddell.  We  are  also  quite  content  to  leave 
the  question  of  our  honesty  and  ability  in  the  hands  of  the  many 
societies  for  whom  my  honoured  colleague  and  myself  have  so  often 
officiated  as  Judges  for  the  past  thirty  years. 
Mr.  Riddell  says,  “We  seemed  to  think  that  the  Apple  (Emperor 
Alexander)  was  only  a  cooking  variety.”  Yes,  we  not  only  thought  so, 
but  we  felt  sure  that  it  was  nothing  else  but  a  cooking  or  kitchen  Apple, 
notwithstanding  what  many  of  our  nurserymen’s  catalogues  may  state 
to  the  contrary.  But  let  us  look  to  more  reliable  authorities.  Thomp¬ 
son’s  “  Gardeners’  Assistant  ”  states  that  Emperor  Alexander  Apple  is 
“  A  large  but  light  kitchen  Apple  of  a  beautiful  colour.”  Nicholson’s 
“  Encyclopsedia  of  Horticulture  ”  says,  “  A  kitchen  variety,  very  large, 
showy,  and  good.”  Mr.  Riddell  has  quoted  what  his  copy  of  Hogg’s 
“  Fruit  Manual  ”  says  of  this  variety.  May  I  be  allowed  to  quote  what 
my  copy  states — viz.,  “  Flesh  yellowish,  white,  rich,  juicy,  and  aromatic. 
A  very  handsome  Apple,  but  only  fit  for  cooking.” 
Further,  has  any  gardener  or  fruit  grower  ever  exhibited  or  seen 
exhibited  a  dish  of  Emperor  Alexander  Apple  in  a  class  for  “  Dessert 
Apples  ?  ”  I  never  have,  and  do  not  think  I  ever  shall.  Nor  shall  I  ever 
place  a  dish  of  this  variety  before  anyone  to  be  eaten  as  dessert,  and  I 
can,  in  my  imagination,  picture  the  grimace  upon  our  good  Editor’s 
features  should  he  ever  be  tempted  to  taste  a  fruit  of  this  variety  ;  and  I 
beg  most  respectfully,  but  decidedly,  to  differ  from  him  in  the  way  in 
which  he  would  have  acted  had  he  been  in  our  position.  His  method,  to 
my  mind,  would  be  simply  avoiding  the  point  at  issue.  The  question 
was.  Were  there  six  dishes  of  dessert  fruit,  or  only  five  dishes  exhibited 
by  exhibitor  No.  2  ? 
My  colleague  and  myself,  after  the  most  careful  consideration, 
reluctantly  came  to  the  conclusion  that  we  had  no  alternative  but  to 
strike  this  collection  out  of  the  competition,  as  it  did  not  comply  with 
the  conditions  specified  in  the  schedule,  yet,  at  the  same  time,  we  con¬ 
sidered  that,  in  perfect  justice,  it  was  our  duty  to  award  the  exhibitor  a 
special  prize  equal  in  value  to  that  he  would  have  taken  in  this  class  had 
the  Apple  m  question  been  in  the  least  eligible  as  a  dessert  variety,  and 
this  award  was  confirmed  by  the  Committee. — Chas.  Lawton,  The 
Gardens,  Welton  House  (jone  of  the  Fru  it  Judges  at  York'). 
[We  see  no  reason  why  Mr.  Mclndoe’s  suggestion  should  not  be 
complied  with  subject  to  the  specified  conditions. 
Mr.  Riddell  omitted  to  inform  us  that  the  disqualified  collection  was 
his,  also  that  an  extra  prize  was  granted  equal  to  the  second,  which 
would  have  been  awarded  had  there  been  no  disqualification.  It  is  clear 
that  the  Judges  acted  on  what  they  believed  to  be  a  sound  principle 
and  from  a  sense  of  duty,  yet  endeavoured  to  do  substantial  justice. 
Knowing  them  both  as  gardeners  of  great  experience  and  recognised 
integrity  we  could  expect  from  them  nothing  else  than  action  in 
accordance  with  their  convictions.  They  did  what  they  believed  to  be 
right,  and  did  not  shrink  from  what  was  no  doubt  to  them  an 
unpleasant  duty. 
