48 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
January  17,  1901. 
A  Peep  into  Old  Catalogues. 
Those  who  can  recall  to  mind  nurserymen’s  price  lists  of  thirty  or 
more  years  ago,  and  comparing  with  them  those  of  the  present  day, 
must  he  struck  with  the  change.  Then  they  were  mere  price  lists  ; 
now  they  are,  or  at  least  the  best  of  them,  full  of  matter  deeply 
interesting  to  those  fond  of  gardening,  and  the  illustrations,  alike  in 
British  and  American  issues,  keep  pace  with  the  most  advanced 
phases  of  book  illustration. 
If  we  go  back  a  century  or  more,  the  difference  comparatively  is 
not  so  great  as  many  people  have  seen  in  the  compilation  of  sale  lists 
in  the  course  of  their  lifetime.  None  of  the  old  catalogues  I  have 
examined  extend  in  size  beyond  small  octavos,  and  generally  consist 
of  only  a  few  pages,  though  that  of  Gray  of  Fulham  (1740),  extends 
to  over  fifty  ;  but  it  includes  botanical  descriptions  of  the  trees  and 
shrubs  offered,  and  contains  very  full  lists  of  fruit  trees,  which 
generally  are  noted  collectively,  without  as  here  naming  the  individual 
varieties.  This  is  not  a  priced  catalogue,  nor  was  it  common  to 
insert  prices.  It  must  be  remembered  that  nurserymen’s  lists  in  those 
days  could  not  be  distributed  throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of 
the  land,  but  they  formed  a  very  useful  medium  for  informing  clients 
when  the  nurseryman  called  of  the  goods  he  had  to  sell,  and  prices 
could  be  given  either  verbally  or  noted  opposite  the  plants  required 
by  the  customer.  An  eighteenth  century  list  of  Dickson  &  Brown,  of 
Perth,  has  the  prices  inserted  in  this  way,  and  the  name  of  the  inquirer, 
with  date,  is  added,  not  improbably  for  subsequent  reference. 
Nor  are  all  the  old  catalogues  dated.  The  Telfords,  of  York,  have 
the  century  on  theirs  ;  others  have  the  decade  as  well  as  the  century, 
and  some  are  absolutely  without  date.  Florists  and  Dutch  bulb 
merchants  appear  to  have  been  the  only  horticulturists  who  added 
new  varieties  annually  to  their  stock,  and  consequently  they  required 
to  revise  prices.  In  the  case  of  general  nurserymen  and  seedsmen  the 
stock  scarcely  ever  varied,  nor  were  prices  subject  to  fluctuation, 
hence  lists  once  printed  would  serve  for  an  indefinite  period. 
Prices  were  naturally  lower  than  at  the  present  day.  Seedling 
Scots  Fir  for  example  sold  at  Is.  6d.  per  1000,  single  plants  of 
Arbutus  at  Is.,  Daphne  mezereum  2d.,  Boses  from  2d.  to  6d.,  Apples 
6d.  to  Is.,  Gooseberries  Id.  and  2d.,  Plums  8d.  to  Is.,  and  Vines  9d.  to 
Is.  6d.  Half-a-crown  was  a  high  price  for  a  single  plant,  but  in  one 
case  we  find  the  double  Cape  Jasmine  (Gardenia)  at  7s.  6d.  ;  that, 
however,  is  a  solitary  exception.  In  the  case  of  vegetable  and  flower 
seeds,  I  have  never  seen  a  priced  list  ;  they  were  simply  a  bald 
enumeration  of  names,  without  any  description.  But  there  was 
ample  opportunity  for  a  choice  of  sorts.  Thus  in  Drummond’s 
(Edinburgh,  1754)  there  are  enumerated — of  Onions  and  of  Turnips 
seven  sorts  of  each,  of  Badishes  six  sorts,  of  Lettuces  eleven  sorts,  of 
Spinach  four,  and  of  Cabbages  ten  ;  Early  York,  Battersea,  and 
Sugarloaf  among  the  last  named  showing  that  good  quality  was  in 
these  days  a  not  impossible  quantity.  Peas  are  represented  by  two 
dozen  sorts,  and  a  fair  number  of  French  and  Broad  Beans,  and  other 
vegetahles  in  proportion.  It  is  somewhat  startling  to  discover  as  fit 
subjects  for  the  kitchen  garden  Virginian  Tobacco,  White  Poppy, 
Columbine,  Balm  of  Gilead  (Dracccepbalum  Moldavicum),  and  other 
plants  equally  unlikely. 
The  flowering  plants  most  extensively  cultivated,  if  we  are  to  trust 
these  old  trade  lists,  were  annuals,  with  a  very  lew  perennials, 
a  limited  number  of  bulbous  plants,  and  Carnations.  Sweet-scented 
flowers  and  those  with  bright  colours  were  evidently  most  in  request. 
Thus  we  have  double  “  Holleyhocks,”  several  varieties  of  Pinks, 
yellow  and  blocdy  (dark  crimson)  Wallflowers,  numercus  varieties  of 
Stocks,  Balm  of  Gilead  “  Migionet,”  sweet-scented  Peas,  sweet  Allison 
(Alyssum  maritimum),  many  Lupines,  China  Asters,  Sunflowers, 
African,  French,  and  Cape  Marigolds,  Sweet  William  Bocket  (llesperis 
matronalis),  and  the  double  yellow  and  double  white  Chrysanthemum 
coronarium.  Among  others  now  forgotten,  but  then  very  popular, 
are  Belvidere  (Chenopodium  scoparium),  Persicaria  (Polygonum 
orientale),  and  Wing  Pea  (Tetragonolobus  siliquosus),  at  one  time 
planted  also  in  the  kitchen  garden.  “Snails”  were  also  popular,  as 
were  also  “  Caterpillars  ”  and  “  Hedgehogs.”  Medicago  scutellata  may 
be  accepted  as  the  type  of  the  first  named,  though  several  varieties 
were  in  cultivation,  Scorpiunus  vermicularis  the  second  of  these,  and 
Medicago  intertexta  the  last  named.  Parkinson  called  them  “  pretty 
toyes  for  gentlewomen,”  and  to  Gerarde  we  are  indebted  for  the  origin 
of  “  Snails,”  the  seed  vessels,  as  he  says,  being  like  “  water  snayles.” 
Lyte  also  mentions  them,  and  it  is  certain  that  these  j  lants,  which 
had  nothing  to  recommend  them  apart  from  their  curiously  formed 
seed  vessels,  must  have  retained  their  popularity  for  a  long  extended 
period. 
Attached  to  gardens  at  the  time  to  which  these  notes  refer  was  a 
semi-wild  enclosure  called  “  The  Wilderness,”  furnished  mainly  with 
flowering  and  evergieen  shrubs.  Hence  the  reason  that  these  are 
represented  very  fully  in  old  catalogues.  Jasmines,  Honeysuckles  in 
great  variety,  Crataegus,  Cherries,  Spindle-trees,  Sumach,  Buckthorns, 
and  Cytisus  are  a  few  of  the  genera  chiefly  grown.  Names  less 
familiar  appear  in  Cytisus  secundus  (C.  seesiliflorus),  Hypericum 
frutex  (Spiraea  hypericifolia),  Virginian  or  Two-thorned  Acacia 
(Bobinia  pseudacacia),  Bed  Bobinia  (B.  liispida),  Cinquefoil  Shrub 
(Pocentilla  fruticosa),  and  Shrubby  St.  Peter’s  Wort  (Symphoricarpus 
vulgaris.  Among  stove  and  greenhouse  plants  such  out  of  the  way 
designations  occur  as  Cynaria  or  Skyflower  for  Agatbaea  coelestis,  Sea 
Bagweed  for  Centaurea  ragusina,  Ami  mum  Plinii  for  Solanum 
capsicastrum,  and  Heath-leaved  Alaternoides  for  Phylica  ericoides. 
The  lists  generally  indicate  the  improbability  of  much  brightness 
in  the  greenhouses  of  the  eighteenth  century.  But  such  as  were  the 
plants  the  limits  of  their  cultivation  were  not  confined  to  towns  or 
cities,  and  it  is  at  this  time  of  day  matter  for  surprise  to  find  a  fairly 
complete  collection  of  greenhouse  plants  named  in  the  catalogue  of 
Dickson  of  Hassendean  Burn,  an  out  of  the  way  village  in  Boxburgh- 
shire.  This  nursery  is  further  interesting  as  being  the  parent  whence 
offshoots  were  established  at  Perth  ;  the  Broughton  Nursery, 
Edinburgh;  and  “Dickson’s,”  Chester. 
f 
The  trade  list  of  Andrew  Lockie,  Kelso,  is  the  smallest  of  all 
merely  two  sheets  of  note  paper  stitched  together,  but  his  stock  wap 
more  extensive  than  his  list  is  inviting.  It  opens  to  view  a  class  o 
customers  not  catered  for  generally — namely,  cottagers  to  whom  flax 
and  lint  seed  is  offered.  He  sold  also  hops  and  “issue”  Peas,  and 
recommends  French  Furze  as  a  crop  to  improve  land. — B. 
Begonia  Caledonia. 
Having  seen  this  fine  novelty  occasionally  during  the  past  three 
years  in  Mr.  Forbes’  Nurseries  at  Hawick,  I  can  hardly  allow  the 
rr marks  of  Mr.  B.  Dean  (page  551,  last  vol.)  to  pass  unnoticed.  Your 
correspondent  remarks,  “  Caledonia  has  to  vindicate  its  character  as  a 
white  during  the  coming  year.  Some  persons  think  the  award  of 
merit  (B.H.S.)  was  too  hastily  given  a  year  ago.”  I  saw  the  eighty 
odd  plants  staged  for  the  inspection  of  the  Floral  Committee  in 
October,  1899.  They  were  not  large  plants  certainly;  yet  anyone 
who  knows  Gloire  de  Lorraine  could  see  at  a  glance  that  Caledonia 
had  all  its  good  qualities,  differing  only  in  colour,  which  is  a  glossy 
ivory  white.  The  committee,  however,  was  not  to  be  taken  by  storm, 
and  no  special  honour  was  then  attached  to  it.  With  others  I  was 
more  than  surprised  at  this,  as  the  committee  had  a  few  weeks 
previously  given  an  aw7ard  to  a  pink  form  of  Gloire  de  Lorraine. 
Perhaps  this  was  exhibited  a  few  times  ?  It  would  be  interesting  to 
know  this,  as  there  are  several  pink  forms  already  in  the  market.  I 
grow  two,  a  few  panicles  of  which,  with  Caledonia,  are  sent  for  inspection. 
The  pale  pink  variety,  nana  compacta,  is  much  more  compact  and 
more  floriferous  than  the  type.  I  procured  them  from  Mr.  Forbes, 
who  was,  I  believe,  the  first  to  exhibit  Gloire  de  Lorraine  in  this 
couotry. 
I  well  remember  the  first  time  I  saw  it  in  his  nurseries  in  1893. 
I  took  to  it  at  once,  and  predicted  at  that  time  a  great  future  for  it, 
and  from  what  I  have  seen  of  Caledonia  I  have  no  doubt  whatever 
that  ere  long  it  will  become  quite  as  popular  as  its  parent.  The 
white  form  is  a  real  boon  to  makers  of  wreaths  and  bouquets  in  the 
dull  wioter  months,  when  graceful  white  flowers  are  none  too 
plentiful. 
As  decorative  plants  they  have  no  equal  at  this  season  ;  to  see  a 
house  full  of  the  two,  as  I  saw  them  last  autumn,  is  a  sight  to  be 
remembered.  In  one  of  Mr.  Forbes’  houses  I  saw  upwards  of  5000 
plants  of  Caledonia,  and  this  was  in  itself  a  rare  treat.  The  plants, 
in  3,  4,  and  5-inch  pots,  were  smothered  with  pure  white  panicles. 
They  were  on  shelves  round  the  house,  banging  down  in  free  and  easy 
fashion.  Caledonia  has  since  been  distributed,  and  is  now  in  many 
lands.  From  American  horticultural  papers  I  see  it  has  been 
exhibited  several  times  over  there,  and  was  awarded  certificates,  and  is 
spoken  of  as  white.  Surely  after  the  score  or  so  of  certificates  with 
which  it  has  been  honoured  it  is  just  a  little  late  in  the  day  to  blame 
the  B.H.S.  for  being  in  a  hurry  in  giving  it  an  award  of  merit. 
But,  after  all,  what  are  these  certificates  worth  ?  A  sterling 
article,  whatever  name  it  may  be  known  by,  is  bound  to  come  to  the 
front,  independent'of  certificates  or  anything  else.  A  case  in  point  is 
Gloire  de  Lorraine  itself.  Sheer  merit  has  made  it,  everybody’s 
plant,  and  it  does  not  say  much  for  the  British  public  that  it  took  at 
least  three  years  before  its  merits  were  fully  appreciated.  Evidently 
its  white  offspring  is,  according  to  some,  to  be  subject  to  the  same- 
fate.— Nova  Bena. 
