the "criterion" of a flower, as I have been before other people of my day. Nobody can question the fact, that I struck out into a new path; the only point they have to settle is whether I am in the right or the wrong road.

The Carnation has had its perfection pointed out after a fashion, for they who have written about the "criterion " were guilty of the greatest absurdity. The stem, for instance, was "not to be less than thirty, nor more than forty-five inches high." What on earth can be urged as the principle on which this ridiculous distinction should be given? If it were worth going into particulars, the stem is the most ugly part of a carnation, and therefore the less of it there is the better; only we are used to them, and it matters but little. The calyx, too, is to be "an inch long, and terminate in broad points." Now inasmuch as the calyx is, before opening, a pointed pod to begin with, and divides into five to allow the flower to expand, this is an impossible case. There are many other trumpery details, and I do not mean to follow them.

The Picotee is passed over as a thing of no important difference, only having jagged edges, and spotted instead of striped. I have placed both on a very simple footing, making no fuss about minor points of no earthly conse

quence, but which amused the ancients; and making every point that is essential to the beauty of a flower well understood. Imagine Mr. Maddocks so wedded to a serrated edge as to make it a property in the pink, and to admit its inconsistency by requiring the fringe on the edge to be fine. The petals, among other qualities, should, he says, "have very fine fringed or serrated edges ;" and then, as if he began to doubt, he says, "in short, they approach nearest to perfection when the fringe on the edge is so fine as scarcely to be discernible." Nay, worse than this, beginning to repent, he admits that it "would be considered a very desirable object to obtain them perfectly rose-leaved." Why, what tom-foolery all this is! he says not a word about the outline of the flower, or thickness of petal in carnation, picotee, or pink; under such circumstances there was very little difficulty in persuading a rational assembly that my plain, simple, and intelligible properties were better worth adoption as a standard. But now having pointed out the flowers which had been defined in a clumsy way before, and the "criterion" of perfect specimens such as they were published, let me ask some who feel inclined to detract from the merit, if there be any, of originating my standards, where they will find the criterions

for the Geranium? the Pansy? Rose? Fuchsia? Chrysanthemum? Verbena? Cineraria? Rhododendron? Azalea ? and half a score others, which none had ventured to mention ? And why was I to be subject to constant injustice and robbery by persons who ought to be the last to take so mean an advantage? There may be a difference of opinion as to the right of touching upon those which had been done by others, and the common points of which might bear a similarity; but there can be no doubt as to my exclusive right to the credit of originating many points not touched before, and entirely originating the standards of other flowers.

Mr. Wood, of Nottingham, Mr. Slater, of Manchester, and some others, gave the properties of certain flowers, which had been previously mentioned by Maddocks, Loudon, and others, as if they were fair game. It was unkind, however, and unhandsome, not to give the authority on the points which I originated. They were not content with the credit due to them for anything they might do, but sought to enjoy the credit due to me. A new candidate in the thieving line has started, with a desperation worthy of Jack Sheppard himself; he has not only seized upon å standard exclusively my own, one which I was laughed at for venturing to establish, but which

B

is nevertheless established; but he has threatened to go through the whole series,—I allude to the standard of perfection for the Cineraria, which, being a star, I insisted should be a circle, and was for months ridiculed for my extravagance. This very standard has been filched by a friend, who gives it as his own, because he has changed the language; instead of honourably quoting my standard, and approving or objecting, he disguises it, and gives it as if it were original. This fact has induced the parties in whom the copyright is vested to collect and publish the whole in a cheap form, that the world may at least see, by the many imitations, how low men will stoop to obtain credit for talents they do not possess.

All I need say of the standards at this time is, that they are one and all founded on principle, and that the strongest proof of this is their universal adoption; for the few who profess to differ are only drops in the ocean; little stones thrown in smooth water, ruffling the surface in circles that weaken as they extend, until they are lost, and the water is as unruffled as before they made their little splashes. I endeavoured to picture to myself what form, colour, texture, proportion, and quality, would look the most beautiful, and for every point I had a motive.

The

circle exposes the largest surface, and is, therefore, the richest; all divisions in flowers detract from their richness; therefore, wherever it is attainable, I have insisted on its being the most perfect. The Cineraria, a flower forming a complete star; and the Pansy, which had its five divisions so palpable as to form a heart with the top petals, wings with the side petals, and a tail with the lower one; the Geranium with its deep indentures; the Verbena with its fivenotched bars; were among the most notorious of the subjects that had to be brought to a circle, to answer my notions of beauty. I was opposed, but they have been appreciated by the public, who did not know why, for their widened petals, and compact flowers, even from a collection; and now the people who considered me mad, or nearly so, for dictating the circle as perfection, prize all these, and many other subjects not named, according as they approach it. Bury Florists adopted the principal standards, and reprinted them; and although they betrayed a meanness that a respectable man would have been ashamed of, by publishing them as their own instead of mine, it is a proof that I had hit their taste. The Norwich Society has honourably printed them, with an acknowledgment of the authorship. Many leading Societies have

The