October  25,  1900. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER, 
371 
Coming  [now  to  the  new  Roses  in  this  section,  those  which  are 
five  or  less  years  old,  we  find  that  they  are  six  in  number.  Of  the 
“two  which  were  distributed  in  1895,  Mrs.  W.  J.  Grant,  that 
beautiful  free-flowering  rosy  pink  H.T.,  already  occupies  the  third 
place  on  the  list.  Truly  a  marvellous  performance  for  so  young  a 
Rose.  Helen  Keller  (No.  19)  of  the  same  year  remains  in  a  similar 
place  to  that  which  it  occupied  in  the  last  analysis.  The  next  four 
years  have  each  one  representative.  Tom  Wood  (No.  28)  the  sole 
representative  of  1896  has  not  improved  on  the  position  it  gained 
in  the  preceding  year,  and  the  same -may  be  said  of  Countess  of 
Caledon  (1897)  which  now  stands  at  No.  37.  The  1898  variety, 
Killarney,  is  a  most  dainty  Rose  with  its  pointed  centre,  sturdy 
petals,  and  delicate  pale  pink  colouring,  and  makes  its  d&)ut  at 
No.  40.  Bessie  Brown,  the  creamy  white  representative  of  1899, 
is  an  undoubted  acquisition.  It  has  already,  on  its  first  appearance, 
taken  up  a  good  position  in  the  table  at  No.  23,  and  is  likely  to 
appear  shortly  among  the  leading  twelve  varieties.  When  more 
generally  grown  it  will,  no  doubt,  be  warmly  welcomed  as  a  most 
valuable  addition  to  the  white,  or  nearly  white,  Roses  in  this  section. 
There  is  one  very  remarkable  thing  in  connection  with  the  six 
new  Roses  just  mentioned,  and  that  is,  that  all,  without  exception* 
were  raised  in  the  British  Isles,  and  by  a  single  firm,  Messrs.  A. 
Dickson  &  Sons  of  Newtownards,  Ireland. 
One  object  of  these  analyses  is  to  test,  from  time  to  time,  the 
progress  of  the  Rose  itself,  and  to  see  in  what  direction  advances 
are  being  made.  If  we  compare,  for  instance,  the  table  of  H.P.’s 
and  H.T.’s  for  1895  with  the  pre-ent  one,  we  shall  see  that  the 
progress  made  in  those  five  years  has  been  considerable,  and  also 
the  large  part  played  in  those  advances  by  that  comparatively  new 
section,  the  Hybrid  Teas.  Taking  the  two  lists  as  a  whole  there 
will  be  found  in  this  year’s  analysis  the  following  ten  varieties, 
which  were  not  in  general  cultivation,  even  by  exhibitors,  five  years 
ago — viz.,  Mrs.  W.  J.  Grant,  Marquise  Litta,  K.  A.  Victoria,  Helen 
Keller,  Bessie  Brown,  Tom  Wood,  White  Lady,  Marchioness  of 
Downshire,  Countess  of  Caledon,  and  Killarney,  while  Mrs.  R.  G. 
Sharman  Crawford,  Marchioness  of  Londonderry,  and  Captain 
Hayward  were  then  so  little  grown,  that  they  do  not  even  appear 
among  the  first  fifty  varieties  in  the  1895  table.  Arranged  roughly, 
according  to  their  colours,  it  will  be  seen  that  in  the  short  space 
of  five  years  we  have  already  in  cultivation  the  following  additions 
to  our  stock  of  H.P.’s  and  H.T.’s.  Whites. — K.  A.  Victoria, 
Marchioness  of  Londonderry,  Bessie  Brown,  and  White  Lady. 
Pinks. —  Mrs.  R.  G.  Sharman  Crawford,  Caroline  Testout,  Marchioness 
of  Downshire,  and  Killarney.  Medium  Reds. — Marquise  Litta,  Helen 
Keller,  Tom  Wood,  and  Countess  of  Caledon.  Crimson. — Captain 
Hayward.  Of  the  above,  seven  are  Hybrid  Teas  and  the  remaining 
five  Hybrid  Perpetuals.  There  are  as  yet  only  ten  Hybrid  Teas 
on  the  table,  but  of  these  five  have  already  secured  places  among 
ttie  leading  twelve  varieties,  whereas  five  years  ago  the  only  H.T. 
to  be  met  with  in  the  first  thirty  sorts  was  La  France. 
If  against  the  foregoing  lists  of  the  newer  Roses  we  place  the 
V  irieties  which  have  disappeared  from  the  table  altogether  we  shall 
be  better  able  to  judge  as  to  whether  any  real  progress  has  been 
made.  The  following,  then,  are  our  losses  during  the  past  five  years 
regarded  from  an  exhibitor’s  point  of  view  : —  Whites. — Violette  Bouyer. 
Pinks. — Marquise  de  Castellane,  Captain  Christy,  Ducbesse  de 
Vallombrosa,  Viscountess  Folkestone,  Monsieur  Noman,  and 
Marguerite  de  St.  Amand.  Medium  reds. — Countess  of  Rosebery, 
Madame  I.  Periere,  and  Victor  Verdier.  Crimsons. — Madame  V. 
Verdier,  Auguste  Rigotard,  Duke  of  Connaught,  Dr.  Sewell,  and 
Magna  Charta.  Darks. — Prince  C.  de  Rohan,  and  Sir  Rowland  Hill. 
Now  that  we  have  so  many  superior  varieties  to  select  from  it  appears 
somewhat  strange  that  we  should  ever  have  prized  as  highly  as  we 
did  many  of  these  old  favourites. 
The  Bride  still  manages  to  retain  the  premier  position  it  secured 
for  the  first  time  last  year  in  the  table  of  Teas  and  Noisettes,  but  is 
TEAS  AND  NOISETTES. 
Position  in  Present 
Analysis. 
Average  Number  of 
Times  Shown. 
No.  of  Times  Shown 
in  1900  in  True 
Relative  Proportion 
to  the  Average. 
Name. 
Date  of 
Introduction. 
Raiser’s 
or 
Introducer’s 
Name. 
Colour. 
1 
39-6 
38 
The  Bride . 
1885  i 
May . 
White,  tinged  lemon 
2 
39-3 
41 
Catherine  Mermet  . . . 
1869 
(xuillot  . 
Light  rosy  flesh 
3 
33-3 
40 
Maman  Cochet  . 
1893 
Cochet . 
Deep  flesh,  suffused  light  rose 
4 
32-9 
36 
OoTriteHse  de  Nadaillac  . 
1871 
G-m’llof'.  . 
Peach,  shaded  apricot 
5 
31-9 
33 
Innooente  Pirola . .  . 
1878 
Madame  Ducher  . 
Creamy  white 
6 
29  9 
2'» 
Souvenir  de  S.  A.  Prince  . 
1889 
Prince . 
Pure  white 
7 
28  1 
19 
Madame  Cusin  . . . . 
1881 
Guillot  . . . 
Violet  rose,  yellow  base 
8 
27-4 
33 
Madame  Hoste  . . .  . 
1887 
Guillot  . 
Pale  lemon  yellow 
9 
25  9 
33 
Souvenir  d’un  Ami . 
1846 
Belot-Defoug^re  . 
Pale  rose 
10 
250 
37 
Bridesmaid .  . 
1893 
May . 
Bright  pink 
11 
23-7 
21 
Madame  de  Watteville  . 
1883 
Guillot  . . . 
Cream,  bordered  rose 
12 
23-4 
33 
Sonvenir  d’Elise  Vardon  . 
1854 
Marest  . 
Cream,  tinted  rose 
13 
21-7 
9 
Marie  Van  Houtte  . 
1871 
Ducher  . 
Lemon  yellow,  edged  rose 
14 
208 
27 
1891 
AV  pRnl  Snn  . 
Lemon  yellow 
15 
20-6 
19 
.  - . ,  .  ,  , ,  .  ,  T  ,  , 
Ernest  Metz . . . 
1888 
Guillot  . 
Salmon,  tinted  rose 
16 
201 
10 
Honourable  Edith  Gifford  . . 
1882 
Guillot  . 
White,  centre  flesh 
17 
20-0 
12 
Marechal  Niel  (n.) . 
1864 
Pradel . 
Deep  bright  golden  yellow 
17 
200 
24 
Muriel  Grahame  . 
1896 
A.  Dickson  &  Sons  ... 
Pale  cream,  flushed  rose 
19 
17-3 
16 
Niphetos  . 
1844 
Bougere  . 
White 
20 
15-3 
7 
Caroline  Kuster  (n.)  . . 
1872 
Pernet . .  .. 
Lemon  yellow 
21 
14-3 
8 
Anna  Olivier  . . 
1872 
Ducher  . . 
Pale  buff,  flushed 
22 
14-1 
7 
*  Ethel  Brownlow  .  . 
1887 
A.  Dickson  &  Sons  ... 
Rosy  flesh,  shaded  yellow 
*23 
130 
13 
Mrs.  Edward  Mawley . 
1899 
A.  Dickson  &  Sons  ... 
Pink,  tinted  carmine 
23 
130 
9 
Princess  of  Wales  . 
1882 
Bennett  . 
Rosy  yellow 
*23 
130 
13 
White  Maman  Cochet  . 
1897 
Cook  . . . . . 
White,  tinged  lemon 
26 
12-5 
12 
Golden  Gate  . 
1892 
Dingee  &  Gonard  . 
Creamy  white,  tinted  rose 
27 
12-4 
21 
Cleopatra . 
1889 
Bennett  . . . 
Creamy  flesh,  shaded  rose 
28 
11.3 
1 
Francisca  Kruger  . 
1879 
Nabonnand . 
Coppery  yellow,  shaded  peach 
29 
11-1 
2 
Jean  Ducher  . 
1874 
Madame  Ducher  . 
Salmon  yellow,  shaded  peach 
30 
99 
6 
Rubens  . 
1859 
Robert... . . . . 
White,  shaded  creamy  rose 
31 
8-7 
3 
Madame  Bravy  . 
1848 
Guillot  . . 
White,  flashed  pink 
32 
5-9 
'  1 
Etoile  de  Lyon  . 
1881 
Guillot  . 
Der'o 
*  New  varieties,  whose  positions  are  dependent  on  their  records  for  the  1900  show  only. 
