(1826)  Page(s) 480, 482.  
 
[From "On the Paeonia Moutan, or Tree Peony, and its varieties". By Joseph Sabine, Esq. F.R.S. &c. &c. Secretary. Read June 6, 1826, p. 465-492]

The seedlings which I mentioned at the commencement of this paper were raised in the Garden of the Earl of Mountnorris, at Arley Hall, in Worcestershire; the seeds were from the Banksii, and were sown seven years ago. In the year after they were sown, three plants came up. One is a very distinct variety; the two others approach each other so nearly, that they will not perhaps be considered sufficiently different to be separated, except by very nice observers. As the flowers of those now to be described are the first they have produced, it is probable that they will very much improve in size hereafter. The plant of Banksii, which produced the capsules from which the seeds were gathered, grew close to a Papaveracea; and from the characters of the flowers of their produce, I am disposed to think that they are derived from the pollen of the latter.

8. Paeonia Moutan Albida Plena. The petals of this are very pale, though not decidedly white ; the colour suffused into them is purplish. The germens are numerous, and are covered with a dark purple membrane, which continues to surround them, and does not burst. The blossoms of this were the largest of the two, and the plant seems to be altogether stronger, and more vigorous.

(1822)  Page(s) 292-293.  
 
Descriptions and Account of the Varieties of Double Scotch Roses, cultivated in the Gardens of England. By Joseph Sabine, Esq. F. R. S. &c. Secretary. Read November 7th, 1820.
The next in my collection is Anderson's Double Lady's Blush, which was given to me by the late George Anderson. It has long and thin peduncles, some bearing a few setae: others being quite smooth; the germen is globose; the sepals are long and narrow; the bud is pale, and in opening shews arich pink; the flower is large, expands well, is flat, and not cupped; it is perfectly semi-double, having no small petals mixed with stamina; the petals are deeply notched; they are of a rich blush colour, but fade off entirely white. The fruits are of moderate size, black, and compressed. It comes into flower later than the Common Lady's Blush.

(1826)  Page(s) 482.  Includes photo(s).
 
[From "On the Paeonia Moutan, or Tree Peony, and its varieties". By Joseph Sabine, Esq. F.R.S. &c. &c. Secretary. Read June 6, 1826, p. 465-492]

The seedlings which I mentioned at the commencement of this paper were raised in the Garden of the Earl of Mountnorris, at Arley Hall, in Worcestershire; the seeds were from the Banksii, and were sown seven years ago. In the year after they were sown, three plants came up. One is a very distinct variety; the two others approach each other so nearly, that they will not perhaps be considered sufficiently different to be separated, except by very nice observers. As the flowers of those now to be described are the first they have produced, it is probable that they will very much improve in size hereafter. The plant of Banksii, which produced the capsules from which the seeds were gathered, grew close to a Papaveracea; and from the characters of the flowers of their produce, I am disposed to think that they are derived from the pollen of the latter.

9. Paeonia Moutan Anneslei. This very distinct and pretty Moutan, is named in compliment to Lord Mountnorris, to whom the credit of being the first who has raised and brought into notice seedling varieties of Moutan in Europe, will be added to the many other obligations that Botanists and Gardeners are under to him, for his continued and valuable exertions in the introduction and cultivation of many of our best exotic novelties. The blossom of this plant is small, not exceeding four inches and a half in diameter, when expanded. It is almost single; the specimen which I received had only nine heart-shaped petals, slightly jagged at the margins, of a rich purplish pink, their bases being of a rather darker purple, rayed towards the middle of each petal, and extending in a line up its centre to the notch at the apex. The stamens are of unequal length, and numerous, and the germens are enveloped in a covering, as in Papaveracea. The accompanying figure has been made by Mr. William Clark, from the specimen described.

(1822)  Page(s) 456-460.  
 
On the Ayrshire Rose. By Joseph Sabine, Esq. F. R. S., &c. Secretary. Read August 1, 1820.

The beauty and usefulness of the Ayrshire Rose are not sufficiently known. The rapidity with which it covers walls and fences, or the sides of unsightly buildings, with its thick mass of branches and foliage, and the brilliant effect of its numerous white flowers during the month of July, in situations where it is well exposed to the sun, and particularly when trained over the roofs of cottages or garden seats, are such valuable properties that no ornamental grounds should be without it. My inducement, however, for laying an account of this Rose before the Society is not to expatiate on its value, but to endeavour to enable those who may wish to cultivate it, to distinguish it from other Roses with which it has been, and may still be, confounded.
A History of the Ayrshire Rose has been published by Mr. Neill, the Secretary of the Caledonian Horticultural Society, in a paper in the Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine (*Volume ii. page 102); and communications which I have received relative to the plant from Mr. Robert Austin, of Glasgow, and Mr. George Douglas, of Rodingbead, near Kilmarnock, have enabled me to add some few particulars to Mr. Neill's account. It is stated to have been raised (in what manner I shall hereafter observe on) in the garden of John Earl of Loudon, at Loudon Castle, in Ayrshire, in the year 1768 or 1769. Mr. Douglas, who at that period had the charge of the estate and gardens at Loudon, has informed me that he gave a plant of the Rose to his friend Mr. Charles Dalrymple of Orangefield, near Ayr, from whose garden it was introduced into the nurseries in his neighbourhood, as well as at Glasgow; it was at first called the Orangefield Rose, but subsequently received the more general appellation by which it is now known. It has been considered by some as a native wild plant of Ayrshire, but I believe there is little doubt, that it was first observed in the gardens of that county, where possibly the original plants, or at least some of their earliest offspring, are still to be seen. Mr. Woods did not consider it as indigenous in Britain, since in his Synopsis of the British Roses, communicated to the Linnean Society in 1816, and subsequently published in their Transactions (*Transactions of the Linnean Society, vol. xii, page 159), he has not even mentioned it.
From Scotland, it reached the nurseries round London, but was not noticed by any of our periodical works on plants till 1819, when Dr. Sims published an account of it in the Botanical Magazine (*2054). His description was made from specimens of plants which cover a building, in the garden of the late Sir Joseph Banks, at Spring Grove; these came from the nursery of Mr. Ronalds, at Brentford, and were planted in February, 1811.
In January 1820, Mr. Neill, in the paper I have above alluded to, gave, besides a general description of the Rose, a botanical character of it, drawn up by Mr. David Don; son of the late Mr. George Don, of Forfar. To the accounts both of Dr. Sims and of Mr. Neill, Mr. Lindley has referred in his Rosarum Monographia (*Pages 112 and 117), under the heads of Rosa arvensis and Rosa sempervirens.
My opinions respecting the Ayrshire Rose do not entirely coincide with those given in either of the publications I have mentioned. Dr. Sims considered it as a variety of Rosa arvensis, but his figure is certainly not that of the plant he has described, and therefore is likely to lead to error. Mr. Don, supposing it to be a distinct species, hitherto undescribed, has named it Rosa capreolata; and Mr. Lindley refers to what he calls the true Ayrshire Rose to Rosa sempervirens. I have some observations to make on all of these points, but it will be expedient first to give a description of the Rose, and to detail the particulars in which it differs both from Rosa arvensis and Rosa sempervirens.
The Ayrshire Rose has slender branches, which grow rapidly in one season to a very great extent (thirty feet and upwards), but they are so weak as absolutely to require support; the older branches are greenish brown, with a few small pale falcate aculei growing on them; the younger branches are green, with a tinge of purplish red, and armed with falcate red aculei; those branches which grow to any extent are so slender and flexible, as to hang down almost perpendicularly from the last point to which they are nailed or tied. The smaller side branches are very numerous, and are abundantly covered with leaves, so as to form a thick close mass; the plant rarely throws up strong surculi, or root shoots. The leaves are deciduous; the stipulae long and narrow, red in the centre, edged with glands, but otherwise smooth; the petioli have a few uncinate aculei and some small glands scattered over them; the foliota are either five or seven in number, the lower pair being much the smallest, they are flat and smooth, shining on both sides, but paler though without glaucousness underneath, ovate, pointed, and simply serrated; the edges, and particularly those of the vigorous leaves, being sometimes tinged with red. The flowers are produced abundantly from the beginning to near the end of July; they rarely grow singly, but are often threes, and on strong shoots the cymes contain many flowers, from ten to twenty or more ; the bracteae are tinged with red, pointed, waved, edged with glands, and bent backwards; the peduncles are long, fine, and covered with glandiferous setae; the germen (tube of the calyx) is elliptic, contracted at the top, and covered with setae, but not so much so as the peduncle; the sepals (leaves of the calyx) have a few fine pinnae, are covered with glands, have a point at the end extending beyond the bud before it expands, and when the flower opens, they are reflexed; the bud is cream-coloured, the petals are large, obcordate, expanding flat, and their edges are somewhat lapped over each other; the stamina are numerous, and bright yellow; the stigmata are united, porrect, and hairy. The scent of the flower is very pleasant. The fruit when ripe preserves nearly its original shape, is elongated, and not much increased in size.
The characters of the common Rosa arvensis, which do not agree with the preceding, are these: the plant, wherever situated, is not inclined to grow to the same extent; the branches are stronger, thicker, and more able to support themselves; the younger shoots have more the appearance of surculi (which often arise from the root), they are glaucous, on the exposed side of more blueish green, and on the exposed side purple and deeper coloured; they bear fewer leaves, and the bush is consequently not so thick and close. The foliola are most frequently seven, and, under similar circumstances, smaller; they are usually broader in proportion to their length, somewhat folded, not flat, more rugose on both sides, an opaque green above, pale, glaucous, and without any appearance of shining beneath, with serratures less sharp, and the mid-rib occasionally hairy on the under side. The flowers appear at the end of June, and often grow singly; the peduncles are thicker and stronger; the germen is shorter and thicker, less contracted at the top, and usually smooth; the sepals are either without pinnae or with only very slight ones, they frequently have no terminated point, and when the flowers open, are not reflexed; the flower at its first opening is cupped, and not flatly expanded; the stigmata are quite smooth, not hairy. The fruit, when ripe, is considerably swollen, and generally nearly globose, but its shape varies in different plants.

(1822)  Page(s) 460-465.  
 
(continued)
The differences between the Evergreen and the Ayrshire Rose are also capable of being distinctly described. The Evergreen Rose is by no means a free grower, and though it extends, when trained against a wall, to some distance, it does not do so, rapidly ; its shoots are equally slender, but not so weak, and they are rather more purple; it forms, however, with its branches and leaves, a very thick bush. The leaves are evergreen, and though similar in shape, are reaily distinguished by being much more glossy and shining on both surfaces, which occasions them to appear altogether of a darker hue; they are also of a thicker substance, have finer serralures, and are more inclined to bend back. The flowers appear from the middle to the end of July, they are less numerous, and generally weaker, but accord in all other points.
On comparing these details with those of Dr. Sims's description in the Botanical Magazine, they will be found nearly to agree, except that he makes the germen of the Ayrshire Rose smooth. But his figure of the plant is altogether incorrect; the leaves are represented as rugose on the upper surface and pale underneath, the germen is without setae, and the sepals are without pinnae, and not reflexed. These are all characters which belong to Rosa arvensis, and are the chief marks which distinguish it from the Ayrshire Rose. Is it not therefore possible that, by some accident, a branch of the Rosa arvensis may have fallen into the hands of the artist who drew the figure, for it cannot be conceived that so many instances of want of essential correctness could have occurred in copying the secimen received from the plant at Spring Grove, and that I know to be the true Ayrshire Rose.
Dr. Sims has referred (with marks of doubt) the Ayrshire Rose to the Rosa repens of Jacquin's Fragmenta (*Page 69, tab. 104), and to the same plant in Willdenow's Enumeratio (+Page 547), and in Scopoli's Flora of Carniola (++Volume i., page 355). But the Rosa repens of Jacquin is described as having shoots only from two to four feet long, which creep on the ground, throwing out roots as they grow, and sending up short upright shoots, which bear from one to five flowers only, and not large cymes; the petioles are hairy, not smooth, and by the figure the leaves are glaucous at the back. It is probably a weak growing variety of Rosa arvensis. The description of Rosa repens by Willdenow accords with that of Jacquin, except that the former makes the shoot two fathoms long; both however refer to the plant of Scopoli, which, from their accounts, is found wild in Carniola, Sclavonia, Hungary, and the adjoining countries.
The character given of the Ayrshire Rose by Mr. David Don, in Mr. Neill's paper in the Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine, agrees well with the plant; but it is not sufficiently extended lo distinguish it from R. sempervirens. As compared with R. arvensis, he describes the leaves of that species as ovate, and of the Ayrshire as elliptic, and represents the fruit of R. arvensis as globose, with peduncle, nearly smooth, whilst the Ayrshire Rose has ovate fruit and glandiferous peduncles. I am not aware that the R. arvensis has ever been found with peduncles approaching to smoothness, and therefore sappose that the description was made from a plant late in the autumn; for when the fruit approaches maturity the setae drop off the peduncles, and leave them nearly smooth. Mr. Neill, though he considers the Ayrshire Rose nearly allied to the R. arvensis, seems to suspect that it may be the Rosa prostrata (*Hortus Monspeliensis, page 138, and Flore Françoise, Supp. p. 536) of De Candolle; but that plant, according to the description of it in the works referred to, has a nearer resemblance to R. sempervirens; it is besides a weak growing shrub, and has its flowers usually solitary and not in cymes.
Mr. Neill states that the seeds from whence the Ayrshire Rose was obtained were part of a packet received from Canada or Nova Scotia, and it appears by his account, that several plants of it were produced together. Mr. Douglas further mentions, that a person, under the direction of Dr. Hope of Edinburgh, was sent to Canada to collect hardy plants and their seeds, for several noblemen and gentlemen in Scotland, who defrayed the expense of the collection by subscription, and that the Ayrshire Rose was raised, in 1768 or 1769, from seeds in the Earl of Loudon's share of the produce of this mission.
(*I have received from Mr. James Smith, nurseryman of Monkwood Grove, near Ayr, an account of the introduction of the Ayrshire Rose into that country, which differs from the history of its origin in the Earl of Loudon's garden, and, if correct, would entirely remove the difficulty which exists of its being supposed to have been raised from North American seeds. Mr. Smith's account is, that he perfectly remembers the Rose, since he was eleven years of age, which, at that time (in 1770) was growing in Mr. Dalrymple's garden at Orangefield, where it was planted by John Penn, a Yorkshireman, who was employed by the gentlemen of Ayrshire to keep their fox-hounds; Penn was a man of some education, and much attached to gardening, in consequence of which Mr. Smith became acquainted with him, and received the account now given from himself; his statement was, that having been on a visit to his friends in Yorkshire, he brought the original plant from some gentleman's garden in that country, to which it was supposed to have been introduced from Germany, and planted it at Orangefield, when, from its covering some buildings within view of the high road, it attracted notice, and so becoming an object of curiosity, plants of it were distributed till it became generally cultivated in the neighbourhood.)
No Rose having the slightest resemblance to the Ayrshire, or to which it can possibly be assimilated, has been brought to us, or described, from the American continent; and as we are tolerably well acquainted with the plants of the northern part of that country, it may, I think, be safely alleged, that the seeds could not have been those of an indigenous Rose of America.
Mr. Lindley (*Rosarum Monographia, page 114) is perfectly correct, in his notice of the Ayrshire Rose, in observing that two sorts have been cultivated and sold in the nurseries under that name; the fact is, that one of these is the common R. arvensis, and agreeing, as I have before stated, so exactly with the figure in the Botanical Magazine, it is not surprising that the mistake has hitherto remained uncorrected; but to his opinion, that the Rosa capreolata of Mr. Don, which is the true Ayrshire Rose, is so identified with R. sempervirens (+Ibid. page 118), as not to differ from it in any respect, or, in other words, is the same thing, I cannot assent; Mr. Lindley was induced, I apprehend, to give this opinion from finding the botanical character of R. capreolata, as drawn up by Mr. Don, accord with R. sempervirens, and from believing the Rose he saw at Kew to be the true Ayrshire; but I have ascertained that the Ayrshire Rose was not in the Royal Gardens at the time when Mr. Lindley there enquired for it, the one supposed to be it, being actually Rosa sempervirens.
Having now, as I hope, cleared away the difficulties which have hitherto prevented this charming shrub from being accurately known, which is certainly of considerable importance to those who may wish to possess it, and no garden ought to be without it; a more difficult task remains to be performed, that of ascertaining what it really is.

(1822)  Page(s) 465-467.  
 
(continued)
That it cannot be identified with the type of any described species is clear; it is equally certain that it has not yet been found growing naturally wild any where, so as to enable us to treat it as a species, or as one of those varieties of ascertained species which, from their not being traceable to a single original, but being abundant in the districts where they are found, I consider as a higher class of variation, or as sub-species of a well defined type. If, as is mentioned above, several plants of it were raised together, we have still to look for its parent, which would probably agree with it, if several of its seeds produced similar plants; but it does not seem certain that more than one plant was first produced, and it may consequently be considered as an accidental variety, referable either to R. arvensis, or R. sempervirens.
The Rosa arvensis is a very rare plant in Scotland, and does not, as I am informed, grow wild in Ayrshire, therefore no seed of that species could have come by chance from a native plant, to give it being; nor is it very likely that Rosa sempervirens, which, even in the south of England, is a tender plant, would have freely ripened its seeds in the climate of Scotland, so as to have casually produced the young plant there. I therefore consider it more probable that the new Rose did actually originate in the garden at Loudon Castle, from some seed transmitted to, or collected for, the Earl of Loudon; and I think that the seed must have been that of Rosa sempervirens, which if it was really imported from America, must have been the produce of a garden plant, since the species is exotic in that country.
The Ayrshire Rose certainly has more affinity to R. sempervirens than to R. arvensis, the inflorescence especially accords exactly, the chief differences being tbat the leaves of the Ayrshire Rose are deciduous, and that it flowers a little earlier in the season. Under Rosa sempervirens I therefore propose to place it, considering it to be a deciduous and free growing variety of that species; in order to preserve Mr. Don's name, it may be called Rosa sempervirens capreolata.
If a comparison be made of the Ayrshire Rose with Rosa arvensis, in the state we usually find it, the differences between them are so numerous that there cannot be a doubt about the propriety of separating them. But there are varieties of Rosa arvensis in which some of these differences are often less apparent, or altogether assimilated. For an acquaintance with these varieties I am indebted to Mr. William Borrer, with whom I have had an opportunity of personally examining them in their native habitats in Sussex. Rosa arvensis in accidental varieties has sported very much, and has produced some particularly ornamental plants; but those I am now about to mention are notk single productions, they are found growing wild in various places unconnected with each other. Of these the first variety has the fruit slightly covered with setae, but does not differ in any other character from the common Rosa arvensis. In the second, the leaves are elongated, and sharply pointed, and the fruit is also elongated. The third accords with the second, except that the fruit of it is slightly hispin. The fourth has many peculiarities, it is far less robust than the common sort, having weak shoots, which are consequently very pendant, and the joints do not grow straight but in a zig-zag manner; the foliola are smaller, less rugose, flatter, rather bending back, aud shining on the upper surface; below they have the glaucousness of the type, though less of it, and somewhat shining; the flowers grow mostly singly, sometimes in cymes, but very seldom in great numbers. The first and third of these varieties agree with the Ayrshire Rose in the hispid fruit; the second and third in their lengthened leaves and elongated fruits; but they have no other peculiar points of accordance. When I first heard of the fourth variety, I expected we had got the Ayrshire Rose in a wild state; its weak and pendant branches, and the shining quality of the foliola encouraged the opinion, but the flexuose habit of its shoots, their shortness of extent, and the difference in the leaves, though approximating, overthrew my hope. Notwithstanding all their coincidences we have still the period of flowering, the fineness of the peduncles, the character of the sepals, their habit of being reflexed when the flower opens, and, above all, the hairiness of the stigmata, to separate the Ayrshire Rose from Rosa arvensis and all its variations, and to unite it to Rosa sempervirens.
In the cultivation and management of the Ayrshire Rose there is little difficulty; layers of its shoots root easily, and it strikes readily from cuttings. When placed in good soil it grows so rapidly, that by the second summer, the planter, if he wishes to cover a considerable space with its branches, will be gratified by the attainment of his object.

(1842)  Page(s) 254-255.  
 
Observations upon the Effects produced on Plants by the Frost which occurred in England in the Winter of 1837-8. By John Lindley, Ph. D. F. R. S. &c. &c. Vice Secretary.
Read December 4, 1838.

The white and yellow China Rose, the sweet scented hybrid, Hamon, and Blairii, were entirely destroyed even in Hampshire; but the latter was injured on a south wall at Dropmore.

(1822)  Page(s) 137.  
 
At the same Meeting [of June 15, 1819]. Mr. Shailer also exhibited a collection of specimens of nine kinds of Moss Roses, sufficiently different from each other to be considered as distinct varities. They were named: 1st, The Single Moss Rose; 2nd, The Semi-double Moss Rose; 3rd, The Common Moss Rose; 4th, The Blush Moss Rose; 5th, The Scarlet Moss Rose; 6th, The Mottled Moss Rose; 7th, The Striped Moss Rose; 8th, The White Moss Rose; 9th, The De Meaux Moss Rose.

(1842)  Page(s) 255.  
 
Observations upon the Effects produced on Plants by the Frost which occurred in England in the Winter of 1837-8. By John Lindley, Ph. D. F. R. S. &c. &c. Vice Secretary.
Read December 4, 1838.

Generally speaking, the Noisette, Isle de Bourbon, and tea-scented varieties, were found the most tender ; hybrids, between the China Rose and European species, were much less affected; the beautiful Rosa ruga, a mule between Rosa indica and arvensis did not suffer in the least at Pitmaston, or even at Redleaf, where the Noisette, and every description of China Rose, was killed down to the ground.

(1842)  Page(s) 245.  
 
Observations upon the Effects produced on Plants by the Frost which occurred in England in the Winter of 1837-8. By John Lindley, Ph. D. F. R. S. &c. &c. Vice Secretary.
Read December 4, 1838.

[• indicates that a plant has been entirely killed, or so nearly so that it was not worth preserving ; Ø that it was much injured, but not killed ; o that it was uninjured, or hurt in no considerable degree.]

Rosa banksiae, - indica, - Bourbon, - hybrids of moschata, - hybrids of indica