June  19,  1902. 
JOUBNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
531 
(Continued  from  page  510.) 
In  the  first  instalment  of  his  letter,  Mr.  T.  Pockett  referred 
in  general  terms  to  Chrysanthemums  at  Swanley,  at  Reigate,  at 
Earlswood,  and  in  Paris,  where  he  had  taken  special  notes  when 
on  a  visit  to  Europe  last  summer.  He  proceeds  to  discuss  the 
great  London  Chrysanthemum  Show  as  follows  : 
“  No'  doubt  the  finest  show  was  that  of  the  National  Chrys¬ 
anthemum  Society,  at  the  Aquarium,  on  November  5.  Nearly 
all  the  available  floor  space  was  taken  up  with  the  exhibits,  be¬ 
sides  two  large  rooms,  passages,  and  corridors  upstairs.  Perhaps 
the  chief  interest  was  centred  in  the  vase  classes.  In  the  twelve 
vases  of  specimen  blooms  of  Japanese,  each  vase  contained  five 
blooms,  and  each  bloom  stood  about  ixnie  or  more  inches  above 
the  vase.  There  was  also  in  most  cases,  an  additional  stem 
with  foliage  attached,  and  tied  to  each  stem,  carrying  a  bloom. 
The  prizes  were  £20,  £15,  £10,  and  £5.  The-  first  prize  went 
to  Mr.  Vallis.  His  blooms  were  just  perfection,  and  every  petal 
appeared  as  fresh  as  possible.  Many  of  the  blooms  were  Sin  or 
9in  in  diameter,  and  O^in  to  7|in  in  depth.  The  varieties  were : 
Madame  Carnot,  Mons.  L.  Reniy,  Nellie  Pockett,  Mr.  T.  Car¬ 
rington,  Mrs.  J.  Lewis,  Mons.  Chenon  de  Leche,  Australie,  E. 
Molyneux,  Le  Grand  Dragon,  Calvat’s  99,  Mrs.  Barkly,  and 
Mrs.  Mease.  The  second  prize  lot  was  also  very  fine,  and  was 
awarded  to  Mr.  Beckett,  w'ith  the  following  varieties  :  Nellie 
Pockett,  J.  R.  Upton,  Mrs.  Weeks,  L.  Humphries,  Lady  Han- 
ham,  Madame  Carnot,  Mrs.  Coombes,  The  Princess,  Mrs.  Barkly, 
Mrs.  Mease,  Mr.  T.  Carrington,  and  Alice-  Byron.  The  third 
lot,  which  w'ere  very  little  inferior,  went  to-  Mr.  Meredith,  with  ' 
the  following :  Florence  Molyneux,  Lord  Ludlow,  M.  Chenon 
de  Leche,  Le  Grand  Dragon,  Mutual  Friend,  Mons.  L.  Remy, 
Lord  Salisbury,  Madame  Carnot,  Mr.  G.  W.  Palmer,  Calvat’s 
99,  Mrs.  Barkly,  and  Mrs.  Mease. 
“  Other  competitors  had  very  meritorious  exhibits,  and  some 
wonderfully  fine  blooms  of  various  kinds,  but  they  were  not  of 
the  uniform  quality  of  those  exhibits  referred  to.  It  may  be 
asked,  how  do  our  best  blooms  compare  with  them  ?  And  with¬ 
out  fear  of  contradiction  I  will  repeat  what  I  said  before  the 
principal  exhibitors,  judges,  and  oflicials  at  the  luncheon  in  con¬ 
nection  with  the  Aquarium  show,  where  I  was  officially  in\'ited. 
“  I  said  that  we  in  Australia  could  show"  individual  blooms 
that  W'ould  compare  with  the  best  set  up  that  day,  but  we  could 
not  possibly  set  up  an  exhibit  with  all  the  blooms  of  that  same 
high  quality.  Why,  there  was  hardly  a  bad  bloom  in  the  whole 
of  the  vases  that  did  not  get  a  prize,  and  I  heard  an  exhibitor 
tliat  used  to  take  some  of  the  leading  prizes  say,  ‘  I  have  the  best 
stuff  here  I  ever  had,  and  yet  not  a  prize,’  although  fairly  beaten. 
Many  other  i)rizes  were  offered  for  blooms  in  vases,  and  they 
were  well  contested,  and  I  think  it  proved  conclusively  that  the 
vase  is  the  coming  receptacle  for  showing  the  flowers  in  the 
future. 
“  For  the  Holmes  Memorial  Challenge  Cups  and  other  prizes 
the  blooms  w^ere  shown  on  boxes  similar  to  wdaat  we  are  used  to, 
but  the  boxes  seem  far  too  small,  as  many  of  the  blooms  were 
overlapping  each  other.  They  wmre  (generally  speaking)  of 
high  quality.  In  the  Incurved  section  (what  w’e  generally  call 
Chinese),  Mr.  Higgs  takevs  the  pride  of  place.  Manv  of  liLs 
blooms  were  GJin  in  diameter,  and  the  same  depth.  The  com¬ 
petition  in  these  sections  was  not  so  keen  a-s  in  the  Japanese 
varieties.  The  fountain  groups,  composed  of  blooms  and  plants 
of  Chi-ysanthemums,  were  worth  seeing,  also  the  groups  set  up 
by  the  trade  gro-w-ers.  Mr.  Godfrey  had  about  700  large  exhibi¬ 
tion  blooms,  principally  his  own  raising.  As  they  appeared  to 
me,  I  thought  the  best  were  Godfrey’s  King,  Queen  Alexandra, 
Sensation,  Exmouth  Crimson,  Bessie  Godfrey,  and  Exmouth 
Rival.  Mr.  Cannell  had  a  nice  display  set  up  on  Maidenhair 
Fern.  I  noticed  the  Australian  varieties  as  most  conspicuous 
in  tliis  exhibit,  such  as  T.  Carrington,  Australie,  W.  R.  Church, 
General  Hutton,  Mrs.  H.  Emmerton,  Rev,  W.  Wilks,  Marjorie 
and  Frank  Hannaford.  Other  fine  groups  were  exhibited  by 
Mr.  H.  J.  Jones,  Hobbies  and  Co.,  Limited,  Mr.  Pulling,  Mr. 
Ow-en,  and  others. 
“  A  few  very  good  trained  specimens  may  be  se-en,  but  the 
staked  specimens  w^ere  not  so  good  as  many  that  we  have  seen 
when  there  was  good  competition  in  Melbourne. 
“  Before  referring  to  other  shows,  I  may  mention  that  I  had 
the  pleasure  of  a  chat  to  Mr.  Bevan  (the  president),  Mr.  R. 
Dean  (secretary),  Mr.  Harman  Payne  (the  foreign  correspon¬ 
dent  and  secretary),  Mr.  H.  Weeks  (the  famous  English  rai^Q, 
and  many  other  gentlemen  that  are  associated  with  the  N.C.S- 
Each  and  all  very  readily  gave  me  a  hearty  welcome,  and  before 
I  left  the  show  I  also  shook  hands  with  the  champions,  the  ex¬ 
champions,  and  was  congratulated  for  doing  my  part  by  sending 
over  varieties  that  would  not  disgrace  them  in  competition. 
Birmingham  Chrysanthemum  Show. 
“  Many  of  you  will  have  seen,  or  heard,  of  the  Birminglmm 
Chrysanthemum  Shows,  which  are  held  at  Bingley  Hall.  The 
last  was  on  November  12,  and  as  a  show  it  was  a  good  Ohe. 
Bingley  Hall  is  very  large ;  it  was  set  out  with  rows  of  tables 
containing  exhibits.  A  band  played  in  the  centre. 
the  surrounding  floor  space  contained  very  fine  groups  of  Chrys- 
antheum  and  foliage  plants.  Crotons  being  one  of  the  <^Mef 
plants  used.  There  was  also  a  quantity  of  trained  and  stak^ 
specimens  of  Incurved  and  Japanese  Chrysanthemums.  The 
best  of  the  former  was  M.  Ferlat  and  N.  Molyneux,  while  the 
best  of  the  latter  were  Mrs.  Ritson,  _  Colonel  W.  B.  Smith,  V. 
Morel,  Lady  Hanham,  and  Chas.  Davis.  The  plants  were  about 
3ft  9in  in  diameter,  and  the  same  in  height. 
“  There  was  a  spirited  competition  in  the  groups ;  the  best 
was  composed  of  a  large  pyramid  of  Chrysanthemums,  while  four 
smaller  pyramids  contained  Palms  and  Bamboos  in  the  centre,  and 
the  outer  space  was  filled  with  well  grown  blooms,  interspersed 
with  Crotons  and  Palms,  and  with  the  addition  of  smaller  plants 
for  facing  it  w’as  a  very  fine  exhibit.  'Hie  cut  blooms  were  not, 
I  believe,  up  to  the  usual  standard,  owing  to  the  fog  being  very 
bad  some  days  prior  to  the  show,  but  some  good  blooms  were  to 
be  seen,  although  not  so  numerous  as  on  former  occasions.  The 
non-competitive  exhibitors  of  Chrysanthemum  novelties  were 
Messrs.  Godfrey,  Wells,  and  Weeks.” 
(To  be  continued.) 
The  Sale  of  Poisons. 
Before  the  Kingston-on-Thames  County  Magistrates  on 
June  12,  Joseph  Hutchinson,  seed  and  artificial  manure 
merchant,  appeared  to  answer  three  summonses  for  selling  a 
poisonous  vegetable  alkaloid  witliout  having  his  name  and 
address  on  the  bottle ;  for  selling  the  poison  to  an  unknown 
person ;  and  for  failing  to  make  an  entry  of  the  sale  in  a  book 
kept  for  the  purpose,  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the  Pharmacy 
Act  1868.  Mr.  Vaughan  Williams,  barrister,  appeared  to  prose¬ 
cute  on  behalf  of  the  Pharmaceutical  Society  ;  and  Mr  T.  G. 
Dobbs,  solicitor  to  the  Traders  in  Poisons  Protection  Society, 
appeared  to  defend. 
Mr.  Vaughan  Williams,  in  opening  the  case,  said  the  poison 
the  deifendant  was  charged  with  selling  was  contained  in  a  com¬ 
pound  known  as  “the  XL  All  Vapouriser  Fumigator,  used  tor 
the  destruction  of  insects  in  greenhouses.  In  a  two-ounce  bottle 
there  was  sufficient  nicotine  to  poison  hundreds  of  persons. 
George  Henry  Steer,  of  the  Pharmaceutical  Society,  deposed 
to  visiting  the  defendant’s  premises  at  Cobham  on  May  5  and 
purchasing  a  bottle  of  the  fumigator.  It  was  supplied  to  hun 
by  the  defendant’s  brother,  who  did 'not  know*  him,  and  the 
defendant’s  name  and  address  were  not  on  the  bottle. 
Harry  Moon,  clerk  to  the  Registrar  of  the  Pharmaceutical 
Society,  deposed  to  receiving  the  bottle  from  the  last  witness 
and  sending  its  contents  to  be  analysed.  There  was  a  label  on 
the  bottle  containing  the  following  notice:  “  Tobacco  is  gene¬ 
rally  considered  to  have  somewhat  poisonous  propertie-s,  and 
the  juice  of  tobacco  which  collects  in  the  stem  of  a  pipe  is  well- 
known  to  be  poisonous.  This  compound  contains  the  concen¬ 
trated  nicotine  of  tobacco,  and  should  be  kex:)t  in  a  safe  place  and 
out  of  the  reach  of  children.” 
By  Mr.  Dobbs — A  special  commission  had  been  appointed  by 
the  Privy  Council  to  inquire  into  the  sale  of  poisons  for  purposes 
connected  with  agriculture. 
Mr  Thomas  Tickell,  analyst,  spoke  to  examining  the  com¬ 
pound,  and  said  it  contained  over  20  per  cent,  of  nicotine,  sutti- 
cient  in  his  opinion, to  kill  between  five  hundred  and  six  hundred 
persons.  In  two  ounces  there  were  one  hundred  and  eighty-six 
grains,  and  one  grain  of  nicotine  would  be  fatal  to  two  or  three 
Mr*  Dobbs,  in  defence,  urged  that  an  article  of  this  kind 
which  was  sold  for  trade  and  technical  purposes,  had  been  held 
to  be  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  the  Pharmacy  Act.  It  it 
were  not  so  the  business  of  many  tradesmen  would  be  rumed, 
and  it  would  be  vesting  a  monopoly  in  poisons  in  the  hands  ot 
chemists,  a  thing  that  the  Legislature  never  contemplated. 
The  magistrates  considered  the  case  proved,  and  fined  tEe 
defendant  £2  on  each  of  the  three  summonses,  including  costs. 
They  consented  to  state  a  case.— (“  The  Morning  Post.  ) 
