3G0 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AXD  COTTAGE  GARDENER, 
April  2?,  1903. 
l/j  Mr.  Burbidge,  and  each  of  the  speakers  urged  the  support  of 
the  hall  fund.  Rev.  J.  Jacobs  propo.sed  “The  Press,”  which  was 
.suitably  acknowledged. 
The  Conference. 
So  much  time  had  been  occupied  by  the  toasts  that  when  Prof. 
Hillhouse  rose  to  introduce  the  subject  of  “Classification,”  the 
time  was  too  far  gone  to  allow  him  to  do  the  matter  justice,  and 
the  subsequent  di.scussion  was  not  of  a  serious  nature,  because 
the  speakers  recognised  that  no  practical  conclusion  would  be 
arrived  at. 
Profe.s.sor  Hillhouse  observed  that  the  genus  Narcissus  is  a 
polymorphic  one:  it  is  still  in  a  developmental  state.  It  is  full 
of  hybrids,  and  the  transition  between  them  is  so  gradual  that 
it  is  difficult  to  speak  of  actual  species.  The  same  perplexities 
occur  in  other  genera,  especially  Rosa  and  Rubus.  Any  attempt 
at  classification  must  necessarily  follow  on  artificial  lines. 
In  Narcissus  there  are  two  fundamental  types  of  flowers.  In 
the  type  represented  by  N.  Emperor,  the  tube  is  divided  into  two 
parts,  the  lower  being  the  funnel-shaped  portion. 
Secondly,  there  is  the  iN.  poeticus  type,  with  a  long,  slender 
tube,  and  the  perianth  immediately  above  it.  The  “  incompara- 
bilis  ”  type  has  become  fixed  in  the  Daffodil  growers’  minds,  but 
it  has  been  given  up  as  having  true  specific  characters.  These 
types  are  said  to  be  connected.  Mr.  Engleheart,  indeed,  has 
“  built  them  up  ”  ;  but  were  horticulturists  to  leave  them  alone 
the  intermediary  forms  would  probably  die  out. 
Again,  taking  leaves,  two  distinct  kinds  exist:  1,  the  Rush¬ 
like,  and  2,  the  flat-shaped.  The  commingling  by  means  of 
hybrids,  however,  has  produced  a  great  many  new  forms.  The 
earlier  growers — Backhouse.  Leeds,  Nelson — did  not  attempt  to 
hybridise,  but  trusted  entirely  to  natui’al  crossing. 
In  the  classification  of  the  genus  Narcissus,  the  .sytem  of 
Baker  is  the  one  adhered  to,  but  Prof.  Hillhouse  could  not  but 
regard  his  arrangement  as  an  unfortunate  libel.  Baker  compared 
the  length  of  the  corolla  with  that  of  the  perianth  segments 
The  speaker  ventured  to  think  that  a  truer  classification  could 
be  based  on  a  comparison  of  the  length  of  the  corolla  with  that 
of  the  tube.  The  longer  the  tube  the  shorter  the  corolla.  These 
are  co-related. 
With  the  increasing  additions,  every  gradation  of  form  may 
be  found.  And  while  form  may  be  realised,  form  cannot  always 
be  expressed.  Our  conceptions  of  colour  are  right  and  also  of 
size;  but  of  form  it  is  confined.  How  can  anyone  exactly  define 
the  difference  between  an  incomparabilis  and  Burbidgei  ? 
Prof.  Hillhouse  then  said  that  he  had  attempted  a  re¬ 
classification  of  the  genus,  and  had  employed  the  names  of  Back¬ 
house,  Leeds,  and  Herbert,  of  the  older  botanists,  and  Barr, 
Burbidge,  and  Engleheart  as  representing  the  iiresent  day  cul- 
tivatoi’s,  these  names  being  applied  to  sections.  To  avoid  con¬ 
fusion  where  these  names  have  been  previously  used,  he  had 
altered  their  termination.  Burhidfiei,  for  instance,  would  now 
l)e  Burhidgea.  Such  changes  being  often  practised  by  botanists 
in  re-naming.  His  groups  would  be  arranged  as  follows  : 
Moi/ni-Cdioiiafi — 1.  C'ouhulaiua. 
2.  Backhousea,  representing  the  great  trumpet  Daffodils  like 
I'hnperor,  and  all  the  yellow  seifs.  Humci  and  Backhousei  • 
('pecies)  might  also  be  included. 
3.  Heubeutia,  for  the  bicolors,  and  all  the  white  or  nearly 
white  seifs. 
4.  TniANuaiA  including  cydamincus,  Johnstoni,  and 
triandrus  albus,  whose  common  characteristic  is  their  reflexed 
perianths.  Probablj'  cyclamineus  is  father  to  all  in  this  section. 
o.  Floro-pleno’s, 
Mcdio-cofouati. — All  varieties  in  this  group  are  probably 
hybrids  of  incomparabilis.  Prof.  Hillhouse  made  two  sub-groups. 
1.  Bapuiea,  to  include  incomparabilis,  juncifolius,  odorus,  and 
all  their  varieties. 
2.  Leedsea  with  Nelsoni  and  Maclei. 
Farri-coronati  embraces  Jonquil  la,  Tazetta,  and  poeticus. 
The  sub-groups  here  would  be:^ — 
1.  Bukbidgea,  the  same  as  Baker’s  section,  the  termination 
of  the  name  only  being  changed. 
2.  Engleheautea  (poeticus  hybrids). 
3.  JONQUILLEA. 
4.  PoLYANTHEA  (Tazctta,  biflorus,  &c.) 
Messrs  Barr  and  Burbidge  s  Classification. 
On  the  conclusion  of  Prof.  Hillhouse’s  review,  Mr.  P.  Rudolph 
Barr  was  called  upon,  and  said  that  he  was  sorry  that  neither 
himself  nor  Mr.  Burbidge  had  known  that  Prof.  Hillhouse  was 
going  to  cpnsider  the  question  now  before  them,  as,  had  they 
known,  they  might  have  got  into  correspondence  with  him  and 
come  to  some  ba:sis  of  understanding.  Before  they  had  heard  of 
Prof.  Hillhouse’s  paper,  Mr.  Burbidge  and  himself,  aided  by 
others,  had  prepared  a  revised  classification  of  Mr.  Baker’s 
system,  and  their  production  had  been  placed  before  the  Nar¬ 
cissus  Committee  of  the  Royal  Horticultural  Society  of  London 
on  the  7th  inst.  [Ihis  revised  classification  was  printed  in  full 
in  the  Joui  nnl  nf  Hnri iculture  for  April  9,  page  316.]  Mr.  Ban- 
then  proceeded  to  enumerate  the  various  groups  and  sections. 
and  to  explain  the  proposed  alterations.  He  stated  that  they 
had  thought  it  unwise  to  break  down  the  classification  of  Baker, 
vvhich  has  become  so  implanted  in  the  minds  of  Daffodil  enthu¬ 
siasts.  It  was  agreed  that  by  a  few  small  additions,  Baker’s 
classification  could  still  be  retained.  Speaking  of  the  Parvi- 
coronati,  he  explained  their  intention  to  name  a  new  section  The 
Engleheaeti,  which  would  embrace  all  the  varieties  with  flat, 
disc-like  crowns.  Nearly  all  of  Mr.  Engleheart’s  seedlings  have 
this  characteristic,  having  been  raised  from  crosses  between  a 
poeticus  and  a  white  expanding-crowned  incomparabilis. 
Rev.  G.  H.  Engleheart,  whose  remarks  followed  those  of  Mr. 
P.  R.  Barr,  said  that  as  it  was  so  late  in  the  evening,  all  that 
oould  now  be  done  was  to  extract  a  pledge  from  the  eminent 
producers  of  these  classifications  not  to  rush  them  through.  He 
thought  that  a  good  deal  of  mixing  of  the  proposed  classifications 
would  have  to  be  done  before  . a  useable  .system  would  be  secured. 
It  caused  him  dire  internal  trouble  to  think  that  his  crosses, 
which  have  five  or  six  different  “bloods”  in  their  constitutions, 
should  all  fall  into  one  class,  and  he  objected  to  running  about 
his  garden  with  a  millimetre  in  his  hand  measuring  the  depths 
and  lengths  of  crowns  and  perianths. 
Rev.  S.  E.  Bourne,  who  was  repeatedly  requested  to  .say  a 
word  or  two,  complied.  He  pointed  out  that  people  in  Holland 
grow  Daffodils  just  as  We  do;  so  do  they  in  Australia  and  in 
America,  and  it  would  not  do  for  people  in  England  to  set  up 
for  the  whole  world  a  completely  new  classification.  They  ought 
to  be  very  careful,  else  there  would  be  confusion  worse  con¬ 
founded.  He  did  not  agree  with  Mr.  Engleheart,  who  had 
stated  that  it  would  be  impracticable  to  be  resorting  to  measure¬ 
ments.  Difficulties  would  have  to  be  faced.  “  Simplifying  ”  the 
classification  is  really  breaking  down  so  many  lines  of  demarca¬ 
tion,  and  would  lead  to  confusion.  He  thought,  how-ever,  that 
what  had  been  already  said  would  afford  food  for  reflection  until 
next  season,  when  soniething  definite  might  be  done. 
Mr.  F.  W.  Burbidge  also  spoke.  He  was  pleased  to  think 
that  his  and  Mr.  Barr’s  classification  had  met  Avith  opposition. 
It  would  only  result  in  good.  He  concluded  by  saying  that  it 
Avas  OAving  to  Mr.  Engleheart’s  having  raised  so  many  extra¬ 
ordinary  and  beautiful  forms  that  a  neAV  classification  had  become 
imperative.  The  meeting  then  dissolved. 
- - 
Cactaceous  Plants:  Cereus.' 
[Continued  from  page  332.) 
■  There  are  about  tAvo  hundred  species  of  Cereus,  among  Avliich 
are  some  A-ery  fine  and  interesting  examples.  The  majority  of 
the  trailing  kinds  are  natives  of  the  West  Indies,  and  the  erect 
species  are  distributed  mainly  over  the  d^er  regions  of  North 
and  South  xVmei'ica.  Cereus  peruvianus  is  often  met  Avith  in 
gardens;  it  is  a  rapid  groAver,  and  Avill,  under  liberal  treatment, 
soon  attain  a  height  of  from  20ft  to  30ft.  The  floAvers  are  Avhite, 
and  open  at  night;  they  commence  to  expand  about  9.30  in  the 
evening,  and  only  last  tAvelve  hours.  Cereus  peruvianus  mon- 
.strosus,  commonly  called  the  Rock  of  Ages,  is  a  very  grote.sque 
plant  very  unlike  the  type.  Instead  of  the  stems  being  columnar, 
Avith  five  or  six  sides,  they  are  tAvisted  and  contorted,  and  very 
much  branched;  the  plant  thus  forms  a  dense  bush.  The 
loAver  part  of  the  branches  become  discoloured  and  woody  Avith 
age,  giv-ing  the  plant  the  appearance  of  rock ;  hence  the  common 
name. 
Cereus  giganteus  is  one  of  the  giants  of  the  vegetable 
kingdom;  it  groAvs  into  an  immense  column,  sometimes  branched 
near  the  top,  to  the  height  of  GOft  or  70ft,  and  about  2ft  in 
diameter.  It  is  a  nath-e  of  Mexico,  Avhere  in  certain  parts  it 
groAvs  in  large  numbers,  giving  an  extremely  weird  appearance 
to  the  landscape.  Specimens  5ft  to  6ft  high  are  supposed  to  be 
eight  or  ten  years  of  age.  This  Avill  give  some'  idea  of  the  age  of 
these  monsters.  A  traveller  gives  his  impression  of  these  plants 
in  the  folloAving  oft -quoted  terms;  “The  absence  of  every  other 
vegetation  enabled  us  tO'  distinguisb  the  Cacti  columns  from  a 
great  distance,  as  they  stood  symmetrically  arranged  on  the 
heights  and  declivities  of  the  mountains,  to  Avhich  they  imparted 
a  most  peculiar  aspect.  Wonderful  as  each  plant  is  Avhen  re¬ 
garded  singly  as  a  grand  specimen  of  vegetable  life,  these  solemn, 
silent  forms  Avhich  stand  motio'nless,  even  in  a  hurricane,  give  a 
.someAvhat  dreary  character  to  the  landscape.  Some  look  like 
petrified  giants  stretching  out  their  arms  in  speechless  pain,  and 
others  stand  like  lonely  sentinels  keeping  their  dreary  Avatch  on 
the  edge  of  the  precipices.” 
The  plant  produces  an  edible  fruit  near  the  top.  The  natives 
eat  the  fruit  Avhen  fresh.  The  seeds  are  pounded  into  flour, 
Avhich  is  made  into  bread,  and  also  enters  into  the  composition  of 
a  drink  called  “  atole.”  As  the  plants  are  clothed  Avith  formidable 
spines  the  natiAm  Avould  be  in  the  position  of  the  fox  and  the 
grapes  Avere  it  not  that  the  Avoody  axis  of  the  old,  dead  plants, 
divested  of  the  pulp  Avhich  forms  the  bulk  of  the  stem,  splits  up 
into  long  poles.  l)y  the  aid  of  aa  Inch  the  fruit  is  knocked  doAvn. 
*  Apaper  read  at  Manchester  hy  Mr.  Arthur  Cobbold,  IIoHy  Point,  Heaton  Mer.ey 
