HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
-
-
Initial post
30 JAN 21 by
Smtysm
|
Thank you much. Really glad it gave you some joy. The experience of beauty is profound.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
17 NOV 20 by
Smtysm
|
Rose Listing Omission
Missy Sooligilly
Sport of Nuit de Chine (more cupped)
Small climber.
Cerise, faintly mauve shading.
Strong Old Rose fragrance.
Strong, honey, lemon, vanilla fragrance.
Average diameter 4". Large, very full (41+ petals - 50 petals), cupped, old-fashioned, quartered bloom form. Blooms in flushes throughout the season.
Arching, lax. Dark green foliage.
Height of 6' 6" to 8' 1 (200 to 250 cm). Width of 3' (100 cm).
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
17 NOV 20 by
 jedmar
|
From where is this rose?
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Hello hmfusr.
Looking again at the possibility of this rose being 'Gustave Regis', do you know the provenance of your plant?
And what did it come as: "Dr. Russell's Yellow", "Vestey's Yellow Tea" or "Mulvay Rose"?
Your rose seems to have more petals and more red on the bud, than I have seen on my "Mulvay Rose".
|
REPLY
|
|
As you live in Victoria, I will presume your plant once came from Stan Nieuwesteeg at Kurinda Nursery. One or two of Eric Timewell's photos of the plant at Maddingley Park, Victoria also came from that source and they look a little similar to your photos. Thank you so much for your help hmfusr.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 13 posted
15 JUN 17 by
Smtysm
|
That is a pleasure Patricia.
|
REPLY
|
|
I have just added a reference which I found of interest. See the 1907 (and 1911) references for ‘Peggy’ Dickson 1905. I don’t think it is relevant to the single “Bishop’s Lodge Precious Porcelain”, but it might be relevant to the semi-double pink tinged clone “Vestey’s Yellow Tea” found in Victoria.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 13 posted
11 OCT 20 by
HubertG
|
I found this in The Sunday Times newspaper of Sydney, 11 Feb 1906, page 2, about the best of the new roses:
" "Peggy," said to be a very charming semi-double flower, in color a combination of claret and saffron yellow. "
There's a very good old photo in the 'Peggy' file. The foliage in it has the look of some HT influence to me. "Vestey's Yellow Tea"; is purely Tea in my mind.
I've mentioned before that my ";Vestey's Yellow Tea" has never shown any flush of pink in all the years that I've grown it. Perhaps it and the pink-tinged foundlings aren't the same after all.
|
REPLY
|
|
My two bushes look as though they have more than a touch of hybrid tea in them. I’ve never seen any pink either.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 13 posted
11 OCT 20 by
HubertG
|
Mine's quite evergreen and a very reliable winter-flowerer. I notice some of the photos here show a much more bristly pedicel than mine typically is. Maybe that's just a cultural thing. Also, the flush of new shoots and foliage is distinctly dark purplish-red, very markedly so.
|
REPLY
|
|
The pink colouring to buds may be in response to colder temps. Do you ever have frosts in your neck of the woods HubertG?
Those old photos of Sulphurea come to mind when I see Vestey's Yellow.
Purple new growth is something noted in Sulphurea descriptions too.
I wish writers of that era had taken the time and trouble to record careful and detailed descriptions.
It would be so helpful when trying to rule contenders in or out.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 13 posted
16 OCT 20 by
HubertG
|
I'm pretty frost-free, but even in winter when it can still get cool, and this rose puts on a good display, there's still no pink. In fact it's one of the Teas that is very consistent in colour year-round for me.
I'd noted the descriptions of the purple new foliage on 'Sulphurea' before, but there is something about the several old photos here of that rose which makes me want to discount it as an identity for "Vestey's Yellow", and I think it's that the leaflets of 'Sulphurea' seem quite small or sparse. Something about it doesn't quite gel as a match. I'll try to remember to take a photo of the new foliage of "Vestey's Yellow" next time. I guess all these roses are going to be closely related genetically so it wouldn't be surprising if many have markedly coloured new growth.
Just a few thoughts on the pink tinged rose photos in this file - I look at the photo by Eric Timewell from 20 March 2013 and just think that's not my "Vestey's Yellow". A rose like that makes me think of Halstead's 'Vanity'. Because 'Vanity' was supposed to be a Tea x Hybrid Tea I suspect it would have an odd ploidy and not produce too many hips (only speculating). "Vestey's Yellow" very readily produces hips and although I wouldn't say that every flower produces a hip, it must be getting close. It would be really helpful if someone could comment on the hip production of the Maddingley Park rose, or the "Mulvay Rose". One peculiar characteristic of the hips of my "Vestey's Yellow" is their little striations. I've posted a photo previously. I've noticed this is a really consistent trait and although the intensity of the stippling can vary it always seems to be present. Perhaps that could be compared to the other roses too. I suspect that 'Vanity' whould have to show some HT characteristics if it was from 'Caroline Testout'.
I'd be inclined to discount 'Gustave Regis' as a contender for any foundling that produces hips because of the early references to it being entirely sterile.
I'm in two minds about "Vestey's Yellow" being 'Mme. Chedanne-Guinoisseau'. On one hand it seems to match and it from the Australian Rose Annual we know it was grown in Melbourne early on. If you look carefully at some of the flowers in that photo some of them have a formation whereby the outer petals are open with the inner ones still forming an unopened cone. This is something I've noticed with "Vestey's yellow" as well. I must try for a photo. Also Mme C-G is closely related to 'Safrano' which I believe "Vestey's Yellow" must be too. However, Sangerhausen gives it a 7/10 for fragrance - from me it would get a 4 at best.
It doesn't seem to be 'Isabella Sprunt' either as VY is similar to Safrano but also different.
'Caroline Kuster' is another possibility but that's often described as having some orange, and VY always remains lemon to sulphur for me.
|
REPLY
|
|
HubertG, I agree with your reservations about ‘Sulphurea’.
‘Sulphurea’ photos do not show “Mulvay Rose’s” petaloids and the general outline seems more rounded than “Mulvay Rose”. The 1919 reference indicates that the purple foliage is displayed along with the flowers, so with ‘Sulphurea’ any new purple foliage lasts into maturity. It apparently had horizontally-inclined branches.
|
REPLY
|
|
I think that a sterile rose may produce hips, but be full of chaff instead of viable seeds. “Mulvay Rose” sets hips but we should, this summer, check for seeds (and I guess sow them).
‘Gustave Regis’ was known for its long “needle point buds” (1899) and the bud was compared to ‘Mrs Herbert Stevens’ (1822). Journal des Roses 1890 Illustration shows long buds. I see I have uploaded a needle point bud photo of “Mulvay Rose” - see 22 SEP 2013, and another on this date of more mature buds, well pointed, but not so needle-like.
Although being erect (1905) and stiff and ungainly (1925), ‘Gustave Regis’ was said to be suitable for pegging down (1913, 1921, 1931). I think I would have a hard job in pegging down “Mulvay Rose’s” upright canes.
But the big thing against ‘Gustave Regis’ is it should not be closely pruned (1922), resents hard pruning (1914), and will need thinning rather than hard pruning (1922). I had never really given my original own roots bush planted in 1998, a hard prune until 2020 when I had a second plant safely growing elsewhere. It loved the hard prune!
|
REPLY
|
|
HubertG I like your thinking.
‘Madame Chédane-Guinoisseau’ was listed by Australian nurseries in 1894, 1899, 1900 and 1904 at least.
As nothing new has appeared in the parentage, we still have the parentage of ‘Madame Chédane-Guinoisseau’ as Mme. Falcot’, with an appropriate Note about ‘Safrano’.
If it was from ‘Mme. Falcot’, consider this (1883) ref “It seems to be a sport of Mme. Falcot. A container plant of Mme. Falcot at Harms Roses was absolutely identical to Ch.-Guinoisseau”.
The illustration of ‘Mme. Falcot’ from Th. Nietner, "Die Rose", (1880) although very yellow, shows both a double and semi-double form which could possibly match “Mulvay Rose”.
Other illustrations of ‘Madame Chédane-Guinoisseau’ seem to be of a more-petalled rose and with none of the petaloids of “Mulvay Rose”. However this is countered by the ref “is too nearly single for open air culture” (1887).
Other points for this identification:
Prune well (1909). Although I don’t think this would be standard advice for a Tea, my “Mulvay Rose” certainly loved my hard pruning in 2020.
The illustration from Onze Rozen, van Uildriks, F.J. , ca 1899-1900. Those eagle beak prickles match “Mulvay Rose”.
There is no doubt in my mind that Macoboy in 1993 photographed the same rose as I am growing as “Mulvay Rose” and he called it ‘Madame Chédane-Guinoisseau’.
|
REPLY
|
|
When researching for the Tea Rose book, we were delighted to see what appeared to be "Vestey's Yellow" labelled 'Mme Chedane Guinoisseau' in Macoboy's Roses, so we contacted the author to ask where the rose was photographed and were informed that the photo had been taken at The Huntington in California.
Unfortunately, further investigation revealed that the rose was not received under that name but as the foundling "573 Shephard Yellow-China Tea" collected by Fred Boutin and when we contacted Fred Boutin, he was adamant that "573 Shephard Yellow-China Tea" was not Mme Chedane Guinoisseau.
The rose was no longer growing at The Huntington when Lynne Chapman went there hoping to study and photograph it and was not in the collection at the San Jose Heritage Rose Garden under either name when we visited in 2005.
We found that the Mulvay Rose and Vestey's Yellow are both variable roses but indistinguishable when grown in the same conditions.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you Billy. It is good to have the history of Macoboy’s photo. You make me want to sit at my computer and search for all sorts of things. But....it is spring.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
6 OCT 20 by
Smtysm
|
More photos close up would reveal more. It could be a species Multiflora from the photo.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
