466 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
November  22,  1900. 
Imported  Fruit. 
As  a  set-ofE  to  the  very  good  home-grown  fruit  exhibited  in  the 
competitive  classes  at  the  Kingston  Chrysanthemum  Show  on  the 
6th  and  7th  inst.,  Mr.  H.  Shepherd,  a  well  known  local  fruiterer,  staged  a 
very  fine  and  varied  collection  of  imported  fruit  to  enable  visitors  to 
learn  something  of  our  fruit  imports,  and  dependance  on  other  countries 
for  our  supplies.  There  were  staged  some  twenty  diverse  kinds, 
prominent  amongst  which  were  forty  fine  Queen  and  Smooth  Cayenne 
Pines  from  St.  Michael’s  ;  huge  clusters  of  Bananjis  from  the  Canary 
Islands  ;  Melons,  both  large  and  small,  from  St.  Lucia  and  Guernsey  ; 
Citrons  from  Madeira ;  Pomegranates  from  Malta ;  French  Pears, 
Spanish  Grapes,  Guavas,  and  Custard  Apples  from  Madeira  ;  also 
Persimmons  and  Mangos  from  the  same  place  ;  Canadian  and  Nova 
Scotian  Apples,  new  Oranges  from  Las  Palmas,  Lychees  from  China, 
also  Chow  Chows,  and  Nuts.  Needless  to  say  the  collection  created 
great  interest. — A.  D. 
- ♦»•»* - 
The  Apple. 
I  HAVE  to  thank  “A.  C.”  for  the  kind  way  he  refers  to  the  article 
on  the  Apple  at  page  413.  Personally,  I  am  more  pleased  that  it  has 
been  the  means  of  extracting  so  clear  a  testimony  as  that  of  “A.  C.” 
on  behalf  of  the  Apricot  having  been  the  Apple  of  the  Scriptures. 
With  regard  to  the  interesting  remarks  of  Mr.  Castle,  it  is  due  to  your 
readers  to  say  that  the  old  references  to  the  Pomewater  Apple,  some  by 
inference,  others  explicitly,  almost  all  go  to  indicate  a  large  fruit.  In 
shape  Gerarde’s  figure  approximates  to  Dutch  Codlin ;  Parkinson’s  is 
flatter.  The  name  disappears  at  the  time  noted,  though  as  late  as  1884 
an  Apple  is  described  under  the  designation  in  “  British  Apples”  from 
specimens  grown  in  the  gardens  at  Chiswick,  and  exhibited  at  the  Apple 
Congress  in  1883.  I  quite  agree  that  the  name,  nor  nothing  like  the 
name,  can  be  found  in  old  lists  of  French  Apples,  but  that  in  no  way 
affects  the  question  of  its  having  been  originally  a  French  word.  I 
have  formed  an  opinion  as  to  what  that  word  is ;  but,  lacking  confirma¬ 
tion,  one  must  be  content  to  allow  Pomewater  to  remain  what  it  is  and 
as  it  is — a  meaningless  hermaphrodite. — R.  P.  Bbotherston. 
Awards  at  the  Drill  Hall. 
The  supercession  of  an  award  to  an  ordinary  group  of  flowers  made 
by  the  Floral  Committee,  by  a  deputation  of  members  of  the  council  of 
the  Royal  Horticultural  Society,  is  an  act  that  it  is  feared  may  breed 
unpleasantness.  Of  course  each  member  of  the  committee  knows  that 
these  bodies  have  no  power  to  make  awards  direct,  whether  of 
certificates  or  medals,  but  may  only  recommend  them.  That  fact  leaves 
in  the  hands  of  the  council  full  power  to  refuse  to  grant  such  awards, 
or  even  to  vary  them  on  occasion.  But  still  it  is  the  exception — and  a 
most  marked  exception — to  refuse  or  to  vary  any  such  awards. 
Practically  the  awards  made  at  the  committee  tables  have  been,  and 
are,  the  awards  of  the  council.  But  the  case  in  question — viz., 
exchanging  an  award  of  a  silver-gilt  Flora  medal,  the  highest  award  but 
one  a  committee  can  make,  to  a  gold  medal,  the  variation-  in  the  award 
being  made  by  members  of  the  council — seems  to  have  an  e'ement  of 
arbitrariness  about  it,  especially  that  the  chairman  of  the  Floral 
Committee,  who  is  more  than  any  other  person  responsible  for  the  acts 
of  that  committee,  is  also  a  member  of  the  council,  and  should  have 
been  specially  consulted  ere  the  alteration  was  made. 
That  there  are  elements  of  weakness  in  the  Floral  Committee’s 
medal  awards  there  can  be  no  doubt,  because  they  are  made  by  a  few, 
some  four  or  five  members,  constituting  an  award  sub-committee,  and 
not  by  all  the  mem-  ers,  as  is  the  case  with  similar  awards  made  by  the 
Fruit  and  Orchid  Committees,  who  proceed  to  inspect  each  group  or 
collection  brought  to  its  notice,  and  making  the  award  in  full  committee. 
Certainly  the  Floral  Committee  have  many  groups  placed  before  it, 
and  with  a  large  number  of  members  its  labours  may  be  unduly 
prolonged.  But  the  labour  all  the  same  should  be  faced  manfully, 
making  each  member  of  the  committee  responsible,  so  far  as  his  vote  is 
concerned,  for  such  award.  The  wisest  course  would  be  to  take  the 
groups  or  collections  in  their  order  in  the  hall,  invite  each  member  to 
take  mental  or  written  note  of  the  merit  of  each,  then  to  return  to  the 
table  and  vote  the  awards. 
Some  bad  feeling  seems  to  have  been  engendered  in  relation  to  the 
original  award  of  a  silver-gilt  Flora  medal  in  the  case  under  notice, 
because  one  of  the  members  of  the  judging  or  sub-committee  was 
a  trade  antagonist  or  competitor.  But  there  may  not  have  been 
the  least  reason  for  such  feeling,  no  proof  being  furnished  that  any 
animus  was  displayed.  Assuming  that  such  animus  was  evidenced, 
it  is  most  certain  that  one  person  in  five  can  display  much  greater 
power  to  influence  the  rest  than  could  be  the  case  were  the  full  number 
at  least  fifteen. 
At  the  meeting  held  on  October  24th  last  year  the  same  exhibitor 
was  awarded  a  silver-gilt  Flora  medal  for  what  was  in  the  Society’s 
Journal  described  as  “a  magnificent  display  of  Chrysanthemums.” 
I  do  not  recollect  that  any  protest  against  the  award  was  made  then. 
Still  further,  I  do  not  think  that  the  recent  exhibit  was  better  in  any 
way  than  was  that  of  last  year.  Personally,  I  thought  a  silver-gilt 
Flora  medal  met  all  requirements.  When  the  first  of  this  description 
of  group  was  seen  at  the  Drill  Hall  it  was  novel  and  attracted  great 
notice.  Now  they  are  practically  common.  The  last  gold  medal  given 
for  any  similar  one  was  to  Mr.  Lees  when  gardener  at  Trent  Park, 
!ind  that  was  a  group,  as  we  all  remember,  of  singular  extent  and 
beauty.  Surely  no  one  can  wish  to  see  gold  medals  common  ? — Critic. 
Spade  ¥.  Fork. 
In  your  issue  Journal  of  Hortioulture  of  the  8th  November  I  observe 
in  notes  on  kitchen  garden,  page  431,  that  the  spade  is  more  suitable 
for  digging  light  and  moderately  free  working  soils,  but  a  fork  is  the 
better  implement  for  those  of  a  heavy  nature.  Now,  sir,  I  have 
always  been  taught  and  recommended  the  reverse — viz.,  the  fork  for 
light  soils  and  the  spade  for  heavy  soils.  My  soil  is  of  the  poorest 
heavy  clay,  and  it  would  be  quite  impossible  to  use  the  fork  ;  in  fact 
when  I  first  took  over  my  present  charge  seventeen  years  ago  I  had 
to  employ  forks  instead  of  the  spade.  True,  what  with  heavy  dressings 
of  manure,  lime,  and  what  soot  I  have  been  able  to  procure,  the  ground 
is  now  in  a  very  different  condition  from  what  it  was.  Having  worked 
5n  light  soils  for  nine  years  I  speak  from  practical  experience,  and 
would  like  to  hear  what  gardeners  who,  like  myself,  are  situated  on 
very  heavy  clay  soils  have  to  say  on  the  subject. — W.  Shepherd. 
- - 
Begonia  corallina. 
What  a  charming  plant  is  this  !  It  lends  itself  admirably  for 
wall,  pillar,  or  roof  decoration  during  the  greater  portion  of  the  year 
if  planted  in  a  suitable  medium  in  a  border,  also  in  large  pots.  In 
the  fine  long  glass  corridor  at  Highbury  it  forms  one  of  the  most 
attractive  features,  and  is  a  favourite  with  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain.  I 
was  recently  most  agreeably  surprised  at  a  Midland  horticultural  show 
to  find  one  or  two  well-flowered  plants  of  it  doing  effective  duty  in  a 
group  arranged  for  effect,  and  where  the  elegant  depending  clusters  of 
light  coral-red  inflorescences  appeared  to  great  effect  amidst  especially 
a  setting  beneath  of  bright  and  richly  coloured  Crotons.  I  do  not 
recollect  ever  having  observed  this  Begonia  used  as  indicated  at  either 
of  the  several  grand  shows  held  at  Shrewsbury  or  Wolverhampton  I 
may  have  had  the  pleasure  of  attending;  curiously,  too,  it  has  been  but 
seldom  that  the  beautiful  hybrid  tuberous  section  of  Begonias  has 
received  recognition  by  “groupists”  at  the  above  exhibitions,  but  I 
opine  that  the  judicious  introduction  of  a  few  of  either  the  single  or 
double  flowered  varieties  grown  specially  for  the  purpose— such,  for 
instance,  as  those  contained  in  the  gold  medal  collection  of  Mr.  F. 
Dawes,  of  Pershore,  at  Wolverhampton  Show — should  be  admirably 
adapted  for  the  purpose. — W.  G. 
Apple  Competition  at  Reading. 
A  LEADING  exhibitor  of  Apples  at  the  recent  Reading  Show,  and 
whose  collection  of  twelve  dishes  was  admittedly  of  the  highest 
excellence,  found,  to  his  annoyance  and  disgust,  that  with  five  other 
competitors,  he  was  disqualified  by  the  judges — happily  I  do  not  know 
who  they  were — and  because  Gascoyne’s  Scarlet  had  been  included  in 
kitchen  varieties.  The  Reading  schedule  imposed  on  competitors 
the  same  classification  as  that  of  the  R.H.S.  Crystal  Palace  Show  list. 
When  the  Reading  schedule  was  issued  the  R.H.S.  list,  that  of  1899, 
classed  Gascoyne’s  as  a  dessert  variety  only.  It  then  did  the  same 
with  Blenheim  Pippin.  But  because  it  was  _pointed  out  that  fine 
representative  fruits  of  these  two  popular  Apples  were  shut  out 
from  competing  because  of  the  conditions  as  to  size,  the  R.H.S.  this 
year  included  large  fruits  of  both  varieties  in  their  classes  for  kitchen 
Apples,  as  well  as  for  small  fruits  in  the  dessert  classes.  That  fact 
seems  to  have  been  overlooked  by  the  Reading  judges,  as  according  to 
the  schedule  conditions  they  were  bound  to  adhere  to  the  R.H.S. 
classification,  which  this  year  included  Gascoyne’s  as  a  kitchen  Apple. 
Unless  the  Reading  condition  specifically  declared  that  the  compe¬ 
tition  there  would  be  conducted  under  the  R.H.S.  classification  for 
1899,  then  it  was  absolutely  certain  that  the  conditions  of  the  Crystal 
Palace  Show  for  September  27th  must  govern  the  decisions  at  the 
Reading  Show  held  six  weeks  later.  Evidently  if  such  condition  was 
not  imposed  each  disqualified  exhibitor  has  a  material  claim  on  the 
Reading  Committee,  for  it  should  have  been  their  duty  to  have 
ascertained  facts  and  then  have  overridden  the  decision  of  their  judges. 
— Observer. 
