January  8,  1903. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
37 
Chrysanthemum  Miss  Elsie  Fulion  and  Princess  A.  de.  Monaco. 
I  believe  these  are  one  and  the  same  variety.  The  last  named 
was  introduced  by  Mons.  A.  Nonin,  a  French  raiser,  in  1899. 
Two  seasons  later  the  former  was  purchased  by  the  Ryecroft  firm 
from  a  firm  at  Maidenhead.  As  Princess  A.  de  Monaco  it  made 
little  or  no  headwa3^,  but  the  past  cold,  sunless  summer  has 
enabled  the  early  crown  buds  to  develop  into  magnificent  bloom, 
when  in  a  summer  of  normal  conditions  they  go  “  hard,”  or  give 
deformed  flowers,  and  the  second  crowns  are  too  late,  and  pro¬ 
duce  undersized  blooms. — W.  J.  Godfrey,  Exmouth.  . 
Like  3’our  correspondent,  R.  Turvey  (page  16),  I  consider 
this  and  Princess  Alice  de  Monaco  to  be  identical.  It  is  a  case' 
of  re-naming,  as  pointed  out  in  the  notes  by  W.  J.  Godfrey  of 
the  previous  week.  This  is  a  pity,  because  the  raiser  of  a  very  fine 
variety  does  not  get  the  credit  due  to  him.  I  had  the  variety  a 
season  or  two  previous  to  Miss  Elsie  Fulton  being  distributed,  and 
it  was  raised  by  M.  Aug.  Nonin,  who  has  given  us,  among  others, 
an  excellent  sort  in  Madame  Gabriel  Debrie.  It  is  a  pity,  too, 
that  the  Floral  Committee  of  the  R.H.S.  did  not  appear  to  know 
Princess  Alice  de  Monaco  and  certificated  it  in  the  English  name. 
The  season  may  have  been  in  favour  of  this  Chrysanthemum,  for 
certainly  magnificent  examples  have  been  exhibited.  I  know  of 
few  varieties  that  have  so  many  good  points.  The  growth,  the 
flower  stem,  and  the  bloom  itself  are  alike  first-class.  These 
qualities  sliould  commend  it  to  market  growers,  although  they 
may  probably  find  the  white  hardly  pure  enough.  Bi^t  as  an 
exhibition  flower  it  is  most  noble,  especially  wdien  seen  in  a  vase, 
the  incurving  nature  of  the  blooms,  as  well  as  their  size,  lending 
it  to  that  form  of  arrangement. — H.  Shoesmith. 
Ydgaries  of  Birds. 
I  read  with  keen  interest  the  essay  of  Mr.  C.  Pearson  on 
birds  in  your  last  week’s  i.ssue,  and  a  few  suggestions  arose  in 
my  mind.  Though  usually  the  habits  of  birds  are  most  regular, 
instances  do  occur  where  they  make  a  departure  from  customary 
traits.  By  some  writers  it  has  been  said  that  the  thrush  and 
blackbird,  such  persistent  foes  of  the  fruit  garden,  consume  fruit 
to  assuage  thirst,  and  if  vessels  of  water  were^  placed  within 
their  reach  in  proximity  to  fruit  plantations  they  would  not 
require  or  seek  it.  This  provision  I  very  readily  made  when 
first  I  heard  such  immunity  were  possible,  but  my  faltering 
faith  did  not  find  much  to  strengthen  it,  for  the  water  proved 
no  attraction  whatever  while  fruit  was  within  reach.  A  large 
meat-bone  is  said  to  be  most  attractive  to  tomtits,  and  will,  if 
suspended  near  Pea  rows,  prove  more  toothsome  than  Marrowfat 
Peas,  w’hich  they  dissect  with  so  much  vigour  in  some  gardens. 
I  have  not  heard  of  any  bait  that  will  prove  a  counter-attraction 
for  whitethroats,  which  among  Pea  rows  are  equally  as  exas^ 
perating  as  tomtits.  The  sound  of  the  bullfinch’s  note  sends 
many  a  gardener  on  a  hurried  journey  for  the  gun,  well  knowing 
that  onei  meal  may  suffice  to  clear  a  choice  Plum  tree  of  its  pro- 
si>ective  crop. 
The  vagaries  of  the  bullfinch  are  as  marked  as  that  of  any 
garden  visitor,  for  while  some  gardeners  are  without  experience 
of  their  bud-fondness,  others  are  annual  victims  of  their  depre¬ 
dations.  It  is  not  a  little  curious  that  they  are  often  a  greater 
scourge  in  town  gardens  than  some  in  the  country.  An  instance 
bearing  on  this  trait  in  bullfinches  was  related  to  me  by  Mr. 
Hoskins,  the  well-known  gardener  at  Old  Down  Park,  Glouce.s- 
tershire.  Curious  though  it  may  seem,  he  says  his  garden  is 
surrounded  by  a  thickly-wooded  area,  wherein  bullfinches  abound 
in  plenty,  yet  his  trees  are  never  to  him  a  source  of  anxiety 
from  their  neighbouring  society.  The  reason  probably  is  that 
they  find  ample  food  in  the  woods,  both  of  buds  and  berries,  to 
keep  them  supplied  through  winter  and  spring.  Yet,  while  this 
may  be  true,  in  other  instances  it  does  not  invariably  preserve 
the  garden  tree  from  his  nefarious  visits. 
A  bird  to  us  more  villainous  even  than  the  bullfinch  is  the 
hawfinch.  As  .soon  as  the  .summer  Peas  are  ready  for  use,  these 
birds,  though  extremely  .shy,  make  very  bold  in  their  eagerness 
for  these  Pea-filled  pods.  'They  will  come  close  up  to  residential 
buildings,  and  Avill  watch  their  opportunities  for  taking  them  ; 
and  their  ears  are  not  less  keen  than  sight,  which  enable  them 
to  “  move  on  ”  when  the  gun  marks  their  presence.  For  a 
change  of  diet  they  will  take  Cherries,  even  Morellos,  from  a  wall, 
not  for  the  sake  of  the  fruit,  but  for  the  seed-.stone  within  it. 
The  wily  sparrow  is  no  respecter  of  the  garden  in  Pea  time,  and 
seems  to  enjoy  in  some  seasons  a  meal  from  the  leaves  as  much 
as  he  does  later  of  corn.  The  jay,  another  shy  bird  of  the  woods, 
finds  Broad  Beans  a  toothsome  meal,  and  once  he  finds  them  in 
the  garden  it  needs  an  effective  scare  to  keep  him  at  bay.  We 
do  not  find  them  regular  in  their  visits — they  sometimes  miss  a 
year. — W.  S.,  Wilts. 
Fagitive  Notes. 
Gently!  Mr.  Raillem,  gently!  When  a  tall  son  of  Anak 
presses  the  pendulum  of  public  opinion,  it  can  only  be  expected 
there  will  be  oscillation  of  more  or  less  degree,  and  there  is 
always  a  possibility  of  a  crash  to  the  opposite  extreme,  surprising 
in  its  suddenness.  Despite  the  3in  restriction  of  the  Royal  Hor¬ 
ticultural  Society  in  connection  with  Blenheim  Orange  Apple, 
to  which  Mr.  Raillem  refers  on  page  .577,  I  doubt  if  this  rule 
has  greatly  affected  the  dinner  tables  of  the  ari.stocracy.  W'e 
all  know  how"  wrong  it  is  to  indulge  in  criticisms  of  the  Council 
of  the  R.H.S. — at  least,  some  of  us  have  been  taken  to  task 
just  lately — but  in  this  matter  of  size,  whatever  any  corporate 
body  may  decide,  society  may  be  depended  on  to  consult  its 
own  opinion  as  to  what  shall  be  brought  to  table  as  dessert. 
We  have  only  to  witness  the  remark  of  a  titled  lady  to  her 
gardener  not  so  very  long  ago;  “We  must  have  larger  Grapes; 
nobody  eats  them  nowadays;  we  only  want  them  to  look  at.” 
In  view  of  this,  the  proper  course  for  the  R.H.S.  to  take  would 
be  to  promulgate  an  order  to  the  effect  that  berries  of  Gros 
Colman  more  than  ^in  in  diameter  will  not  be  eligible  for  com¬ 
petition.  Whatever  may  be  the  opinion  of  others,  I  shall  not 
join  issue  with  Mr.  Raillem  on  this  subject  of  Apples,  for  I 
know  only  too  well  which  I  should  accept  if  offered  the  choice 
between  a  large  or  a  small  fruit.  And  we  most  of  us  know 
that,  whatever  Mr.  Raillem  may  choose  to  say  as  to  the  relative 
proportions  of  core  and  rind,  his  opponents  usually  find  the 
remarks  emanating  from  his  pen  sufficiently  pithy. 
Inventions. 
I  notice  another  attempt  (page  587)  has  been  made  to  re¬ 
suscitate  this  question.  It  would  be  well  if  some  of  those  who 
periodically  raise  the  cry  of  gardeners’  conservatism  would  go 
a  little  more  into  detail  as  to  the  need  of  inventive  faculties  in 
gardening,  and  the  special  items  upon  which  those  faculties  are 
to  be  exercised.  “Necessity  is  the  mother  of  invention,”  and, 
again,  “Necessity  knows  no  law;”  and,  depend  upon  it, 
“Aster,”  as  real  need  arises  for  improvement  and  development, 
the  men  and  the  means  will  be  found.  “  Strong  men  come  when 
England  calls,”  says  our  old  friend,  “Onward,”  and  there  is  a 
sound  of  strength  and  truth  in  his  ci-y.  When  our  remote 
successors  are  able  to  mount  their  aeroplanes,  and  flit  from  tree 
to  tree  plying  their  electric  saws  or  secateurs,  or  gathering  the 
vastly  improved  fruits  of  their  day — and  this  is  not  such  an 
absurd  proposition  as  may  on  the  first  glance  appear — there  will 
still  be  those  who  call  for  still  further  progress  and  the  resource 
of  the  inventive  genius  of  their  time;  and  this  will  only  be 
showing  a  very  proper  spirit,  even  as  it  is  at  the  present  day. 
Still,  we  should  like  to  know  what  is  needed,  and  in  what 
direction  invention  is  to  be  guided. 
Illegal  Showing. 
Our  friends  still  keep  hammering  away  at ‘this  vexatious 
subject.  For  my  part,  I  am  not  willing  to  admit  that  the  dis¬ 
honesty  and  corruption  are  as  bad  or  as  far-reaching  as  some 
would  have  us  believe.  With  small  shows  the  difficulty  is  not 
as  great  as  with  the  larger  ones.  Warning  off,  after  inspection 
of  gardens,  has  frequently  met  the  offence,  and  one  case  I  might 
quote  here,  as  showing  how  judges  themselves  may  often  assist. 
At  two  small  shows  in  Surrey  it  was  an  open  secret  that  the 
Potatoes  of  one  exhibitor  travelled  from  one  village  t-o  the 
other,  where,  the  competitions  not  being  open,  he  was  excluded 
from  entering.  For  some  years  this  man  managed  to  take  the 
leading  prizes  at  both  shows,  but  the  judges  cunningly  inserted 
pins  in  the  first  prize  dishes  one  season — the  sequel  to  this 
action  was  that,  in  a  week’s  time,  these  same  Potatoes  were 
disqualified.  Tlie  larger  the  exhibition  the  more  difficult  it 
becomes  to  bring  the  offenders  to  justice.  Illegal  showing  is 
a  fraudulent  practice,  and  is,  or  ought  to  be,  made  an  indictable 
offence.  Upon  wbom  lies  the  onus  of  proof  has  been  asked, 
for,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  this  idea  has  been  previously  mooted. 
Why,  upon  the  committees,  of  course.  W^e  know  they  are  slow 
to  act,  and  proof  is  not  easy;  but  the  very  thought  of  risk 
would  act  as  a  deterrent  to  many,  and  one  or  two  convictions, 
I  am  convinced,  would  have  a  remarkably  cleansing  effect. — 
A  Provincial  F. R.H.S.  ,  n,  •  » 
[We  trust  that  the  discussion  on  “  Illegal  Showing  may  not 
have  been  fruitless,  but  that,  apparent  or  otherwise,  certain 
rectifications  may  be,  or  have  been,  the  outcome. — Ec.] 
