July  22,  1897. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
73 
Rose  Show  Fixtures  fob  1897. 
July  22nd  (Thuriday). — Halifax,  Trentham,  and  Bedale. 
„  23rd  (Friday). — Ulverstone. 
„  27th  (Tuesday). — Tlbsbelf. 
„  28th  (Wednesday). — Chester.* 
„  Slst  (Saturday). — Liverpool.* 
*  Shows  lasting  two  days. 
Medea  and  Mabechal  Niel. 
I  CANNOT  suppose  that  there  really  exists  much  difference  between 
“  W.  E.  Eaillem  ”  and  myself  regarding  the  respective  merits  of  Medea 
and  Mar^chal  Niel.  1  was  not  thinking  much  of  Roses  for  the  con¬ 
servatory  (of  which  the  Mar^chal  is  unquestionably  the  king)  when  I 
wrote  the  article  to  which  your  versatile  correspondent  refers,  but  of 
Roses  adapted  for  open  air  cultivation.  I  quite  admit  that  of  the  two 
varieties  Mar4chal  Niel  has  the  deeper  hue  and,  when  fully  expanded, 
the  finer  formation.  But  Medea  is  also  a  very  impressive  Rose.  Here  it 
has  been  of  beautiful  colour  and  of  immense  substance.  It  has,  in 
addition  to  its  distinctive  beauty,  the  great  merit  of  perpetuality. 
Mar^chal  Niel  is  not  adapted,  in  Scotland  at  least,  for  garden  cultiva¬ 
tion.  It  is,  on  the  other  hand,  a  superb  Rose  for  the  conservatory,  in 
which,  as  I  have  indicated,  it  reigns  supreme. — David  R.  Williamson. 
Comments. 
The  Jubilee  celebrations  altered  many  things  this  year,  and  for  the 
first  time  since  the  National  Rose  Society  went  to  the  Crystal  Palace,  the 
show  was  not  held  on  a  Saturday.  To  many  of  us  this  was  a  great  boon, 
for  as  the  parsonic  element  is  very  strong  in  the  Society,  the  alteration 
of  the  day  to  Friday  enabled  them  to  get  off  comfortably  home  and  have 
a  day’s  rest  before  the  Sunday  ;  it  added  moreover  to  the  comfort  of  the 
exhibitors  and  visitors,  for  as  there  was  not  anything  like  the  number  of 
people  that  there  is  on  Saturday,  locomotion  was  more  easy,  and  many 
people  said  they  enjoyed  the  Roses  better  than  they  had  done  previously. 
There  was,  however,  this  disadvantage,  that  there  having  been  a  pro¬ 
menade  concert  and  fireworks  the  night  before,  the  officials  did  not  begin 
the  arrangements  for  the  show  until  10  30,  so  that  the  whole  had  a  very 
unfinished  appearance.  _ 
The  Show  was  held  in  the  centre  transept,  opposite  the  great  organ, 
and  in  the  concert  room — the  latter  a  most  inappropriate  place.  The 
day  was  dull  though  fine,  and  the  consequence  was  that  the  Roses  in 
this  part  of  the  exhibition  did  not  show  at  all  to  advantage,  and  many 
a  growl  came  from  amateur  exhibitors  against  the  obscurity  in  which 
their  fine  flowers  were  placed.  The  complaint  was  a  just  one,  but 
unfortunately  the  Society  has  no  choice  in  the  matter.  Either  the 
amateurs  or  professionals  should  be  relegated  to  the  concert  room,  and 
should  the  show  be  held  next  year  in  the  same  place  the  conditions 
must  be  reversed,  and  the  concert  room  be  assigned  to  the  professionals. 
I  have  attended  all  metropolitan  exhibitions  held  by  the  Society,  and 
1  can  safely  say,  according  to  my  judgment,  it  was,  as  far  as  the  quality 
of  the  flowers  was  concerned,  the  best  that  we  have  ever  had.  Mr. 
Mawley  has  already  said  how  extensive  it  was,  snd  how  the  English 
counties  contributed  towards  it.  Scotland  was  unrepresented,  and,  of 
course,  we  cannot  call  Messrs.  A.  Dickson  &  Sons  of  [Newtownards  Irish 
exhibitors  pare  and  simple.  One  object  thev  had.  I  believe,  in  taking  up 
the  old  classic  ground  occupied  by  Mr.  W.i  J.  Grant  at  Ledbury,  was 
that  they  might  compete  more  favourably  at  the  early  English  shows. 
The  prize  list  gave  ample  evidence  of  the  extent  and  excellence  of  the 
exhibition,  for  there  were  only  two  classes  in  which  all  the  prizes  were 
not  awarded,  and  these  were  the  garden  Roses.  This  will  of  course  tell 
heavily  on  the  finances  of  the  Society,  for  there  have  sometimes  been 
upwards  of  £20  not  awarded.  _ 
An  attempt  was  made  to  connect  the  show  with  the  Jubilee  by 
having  a  special  class  for  table  decorations.  In  my  judgment  this  was  a 
failure.  Roses,  even  under  the  practised  hand  of  Mrs.  Orpen.  are  very 
difficult  to  arrange,  and  although  her  arrangement  was  tasteful  and  she 
did  the  best  that  she  could,  yet  one  felt  how  much  better  she  would 
have  done  had  she  been  able  to  introduce  other  flowers.  In  regard  to 
the  vases  of  Roses  there  could  be  but  one  opinion  as  to  which  merited 
the  first  place,  and  the  vase  which  was  placed  third  would  undoubtedly 
have  been  second  but  for  for  some  unfortunately  heavy  grass  which  was 
introduced  and  entirely  marred  the  lightness  of  the  arrangement. 
Another  very  pleasing  feature  about  the  exhibition  was  the  consider¬ 
able  accession  of  new  exhibitors  ;  for  while  one  is  always  ready  to 
welcome  the  old  practised  hands,  which  have  for  so  many  years 
contributed  to  the  success  of  our  shows,  the  addition  of  new  blood 
affords  a  surer  guarantee  for  the  future  welfare  of  the  Society.  Looking 
back  we  cannot  but  feel  how  much  we  miss  such  names  as  Baker, 
Jowett,  Hall,  and  Whitwell,  and  are,  therefore,  thankful  when  we  find 
fresh  names  amongst  our  lists  of  prizewinners ;  and  in  looking  through 
the  lists  of  this  show  we  find  many  who  even  at  their  first  attempt  have 
carried  off  honours.  This  is,  no  doubt,  to  be  attributed  in  large  measure 
to  a  system  adopted  on  the  initiative  of  Mr.  Charles  J.  Grahame  of 
classifying  exhibitors  according  to  the  number  of  plants  grown.  Had 
the  old  system  still  been  in  vogue  these  persons  would  have  been 
deterred  by  the  feeling  that  they  had  to  come  into  competition  with 
growers  who  had  big  battalions  to  draw  from,  and  had,  therefore,  of 
course,  a  greater  chance  of  success  on  the  show  day.  At  the  time  this 
was  proposed  I  very  much  doubted  its  wisdom,  but  I  have  for  some 
time  seen  that  the  promoters  of  it  were  quite  right. 
This  exhibition  showed  another  great  change,  I  mean  in  stands  for 
new  Roses.  Formerly  these  were  composed  of  flowers  of  which  we 
could  only  say  that  we  hoped  some  of  them  might  turn  out  well.  They 
were  nearly  all  foreign-raised  flowers,  and  as  they  were  cut  from  under  el »S8 
they  were  certainly  in  most  instances  flimsy  and  poor  in  colour.  Now, 
however,  since  so  many  Roses  have  been  raised  in  our  own  country,  the 
case  is  completely  altered,  and  it  is  certainly  very  remarkable  that  in  the 
first-prize  stand  with  which  Messrs.  A.  Dickson  &  Sons  were  the  winners 
all  the  flowers  were  of  their  own  raising.  They  coip prised  Countess  of 
Caledon,  Tom  Wood,  Lady  Clanmorris,  Ulster,  Killarney,  Eileen,  Mrs. 
W.  J.  Grant,  Mrs.  Mawley,  Bessie  Brown,  First  Cross,  Mrs.  Grahame, 
and  Daisy  ;  they  also  secured  the  first  prize  for  the  best  twelve  blooms 
of  any  new  Rose  with  a  splendid  dozen  of  Mrs.  W.  J.  Grant.  In  the 
amateurs’  division  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Pemberton  was  first  with  six  new 
Roses  —  viz..  Marquise  Litta,  Marchioness  of  Downshire,  Captain 
Hayward,  Helen  Keller,  Charlotte  Guillemot,  and  Mrs.  S.  Crawford, 
and  of  these  only  two  were  from  foreign  raisers. — D.,  Deal, 
NAPHTHALENE. 
I  HAVE  read  with  some  surprise,  and  not  a  little  enjoyment,  an 
article  entitled  “Naphthalene”  in  your  issue  of  last  week  (page  47), 
and  as  its  contents  concern  me  personally  in  the  dual  capacity  of 
chemist  and  inventor  of  the  paraffin-naphthalene  emulsion  I  feel 
called  upon  to  set  your  readers  right  on  certain  points. 
It  would  be  well  for  the  public  to  clearly  understand  that  the 
formulae  and  prescriptions  put  forward  by  your  contributor  Mr.  Abbey 
are  imperfect  quotations  from,  and  covered  by,  the  complete  specifications 
of  my  English  patent  (13201,  1895)  or  its  German  counterpart  (88,666), 
that  both  these  patents  are  the  trade  property  of  firms  who  might  sue  for 
damages  any  persons  who  infringed  the  patent  rights  by  following  Mr. 
Abbey’s  instructions. 
It  should  also  be  understood  that  even  preparing  a  patented  article 
for  home  or  personal  use  is  legally  an  infringement  of  patent.  This  is 
a  matter  with  which  I  have  no  personal  concern,  but  I  am  concerned  in 
the  obvious  failure  that  would  follow  the  attempts  of  any  gardener  to 
make  an  effective  wash  from  Mr.  Abbey’s  directions,  as  he  has  strangely 
muddled  and  misinterpreted  the  instructions. 
All  residents  in  Kent  and  Surrey  have  been  secured  free  rights  under 
th^  patent,  and  any  such  persons  with  sufficient  interest  in  the  garden 
to  seek  a  cure  for  its  peats  can  obtain  adequate  instructions  by  applying 
to  tbe  South-Eastern  Agricultural  College,  Wye,  Kent. 
Mr.  Abbey’s  article,  “  Naphthalene,”  certainly  holds  pride  of  place 
in  my  album  of  curiosities  of  chemical  literature.  I  picture  the  writer 
aa  a  gentleman  brimful  of  chemical  zeal  and  horticultural  acumen,  and 
with  the  trifiing  assistance  of  his  native  genius  and  a  chemical  text¬ 
book  a  little  out  of  date,  he  has  certainly  produced  an  essay  of  an  extra¬ 
ordinary  and  astounding  kind. 
Some  little  experience  in  reading  the  papers  of  students  of  chemistry 
has  brought  occasional  relief  to  the  tedium  of  the  task,  but  in  all  my 
life  these  eyes  have  never  yet  found  refreshment  on  such  a  glorious  and 
unstinted  flow  of  chemical  “  bowlers”  of  the  very  finest  type — no  mere 
batch  of  unnamed  seedlings,  but  stage  flowers  of  the  choicest  named 
varieties. 
Perchance  your  interesting  contributor  is  merely  joking,  some  hearty 
horticultural  humourist  who  is  having  his  little  fling  at  the  expense  of  the 
unfortunate  complexities  of  organic  chemistry.  If  so,  I  cry,  “Hold, 
enough,  have  mercy,  and  vent  your  merry  wit  on  some  less  serious 
science — entomology,  nematodes,  anything  long-suffering,  more  fit  for 
such  attentions.” 
Meanwhile  I  would  respectfully  urge  that  Mr.  Abbey  be  completely 
insulated  in  your  readers’  minds  within  his  own  charmed  circle  of 
chemical  curiosities,  where  the  naphthalene  potassium  (0^038^2)1 
raises  no  smile,  where  the  fertilising  assistance  of  nitrobenzene  raises  no 
blush  to  Flora’s  cheek,  and  the  softsoap  prepared  from  paraffin  and 
potash  proves  perfect  quietus  for  impetuous  eelworm  or  lurking 
bacillus 
Finally  I  would  heartily  congratulate  so  bold  an  investigator  on  his 
safe  survival  of  such  perilous  laboratory  exploits  as  are  set  forth  in  his 
paper  on  “  Naphthalene,”  and  that  he  still  lives  to  enlighten,  stimulate, 
and  amuse  is  scarcely  less  astonishing  than  his  literary  production.  I 
enclose  my  card. — The  Patentee. 
[If  patents  were  granted  for  good  humour  and  happy,  racy  expres¬ 
sion  under  trying  circumstances  such  as  alleged  “  infringements  ”  and 
“  misquotations,”  we  think  our  distinguished  correspondent  would  be 
entitled  to  the  grant.  His  preparation  we  have  heard  spoken  of  in  the 
highest  terms  of  approval  by  a  gardener  whose  facilities  for  testing 
various  compounds  for  the  destruction  of  p'ant  pests  are  such  as  are 
possessed  by  few  persons  who  are  scientifically  or  practically  interested 
in  the  important  subject.] 
