HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Member
Profile
PhotosFavoritesCommentsJournalCuttings 
HubertG
most recent 2 days ago HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 4 days ago by HubertG
The 1909 reference indicates that this rose is a Polyantha, and not a Portland as is currently listed in the profile page. Also I'm not sure which name would be correct - 'Miss Pollock' or 'Miss Dorothea Pollock', but my guess would be the latter.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 3 posted 4 days ago by jedmar
Corrected the class and added the synonym. Thank you!
REPLY
Reply #2 of 3 posted 3 days ago by Patricia Routley
A wee bit of info about the family?
From the Queensland Post Office Directory 1929-1930
p1281. Seed Merchants, Seedsmen & Nurserymen: Pollock, Morgan & Co., Ruthven St., Toowoomba.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 3 posted 2 days ago by HubertG
Maybe.
I did find out that a Miss Dorothea Kathleen Pollock was a school teacher in Brisbane and died 8 Nov 1921. She must have been held in some regard because a memorial plaque was unveiled at her school in 1922. From 'The Brisbane Courier' 21 Apr 1922:

"A Memorial Tablet.
A memorial tablet to the memory of Miss Dorothea K. Pollock will be unveiled at the Darra State School to-morrow afternoon by the Minister for Public Instruction. Friends of the late Miss Pollock are invited by advertisement to be present."

It's very tempting to think that if this is the same Miss Pollock, and if it was known that she had a rose named after her, that her rose was planted somewhere onsite and still survives somewhere. In another clipping it is clear her parents survived her. Perhaps they preserved her rose. I don't know if any HMF enthusiasts in Brisbane could possibly check this out. Also, the fund set up in her name was still operating in 1940 and proceeds seem to be going to sick children.
REPLY
most recent 2 days ago SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 11 OCT 10 by Patricia Routley
In Brisbane in the past few days, I stood with Jennie O'Brien Lutton in front of a large bush (6 feet high?) of "Rita Petersen". (The bush was labelled Peterson, but the references seem to show that it may have been Petersen) There were two fairly distinct flowers on the bush, light pink flowers with a darker outer circle, and other flowers with the main colour being a dark pink. The bush looked more like a tea, than a china, to me. Very smooth wood between mature brown prickles (the older were gray) and many canes were thornless. The pedicel was prickly and the receptacle was long with no narrowing at the top where it met the bud. The opening bud was a very dark pink.

For the moment HelpMeFind has kept "Rita Petersen" as being a clone of 'Archiduc Charles', but if there are any other Australian thoughts that it may be something else entirely, it is a easy matter to separate this foundling into its own file. The following is from a private email to me from Jennie O'Brien Lutton dated September 8, 2006. As Jennie has a great interest in this rose, I know she would agree with this public sharing of part of the history of "Rita Petersen". She said:

I wrote to all and invited them to meet at the heritage area in New Farm Park. This garden was designed by Heritage Roses in Australia members in about 1990, and most of the roses were supplied by them. Probably in 1996 or 1997, a city council gardener, Colin Robards, was in charge of the Heritage area. He showed a great interest and made a big effort to get plans drawn and roses labelled. Rita Mortiss (HRIA member and one of the team originaly responsible for the heritage Rose planting in the park) and I, undertook to provide the correct details for the labels. We spent a lot of time double and triple checking references and discussing which we would choose when there was some difference in information. There are a few roses with labels like "Herston Rose" and "Sandgate Rose", these being the suburbs in which the old rose was found and propagated. We decided to label "Rita Petersen" with her name, even though we could find no record of it anywhere. Several people had told us it was "Rita Petersen". Roly Kent (now deceased), long time president of the QRS had actually told Rita Mortiss the name of the rose. Another of our long term members, Lionel Chitts, who was also part of the original HRIA team in the Heritage Area at New Farm Park, had the name from other sources. I had been told by a very elderly lady with a strong accent (probably Greek or Italian) over her fence that "everyone grows this Rita". The first time we saw anything about Rita Peterson in print, apart from Sue Zwar's comments about New Farm Park, was the reprint of Editor Stewart's article in the journal. We then felt that our decision to label the rose with the name had been the correct decision, even if the name of the rose was not proved. Editor Stewarts comments are interesting. Was General Galleni a popular rose at that time? Could he possibly not have seen it enough to positively identify it, or was he just repeating the text from Heers catalogue? There are certainly some similarities - the main being muddled and variable colour. Both have very variable blooms, size, colour shape etc even simultaneously However the General is red and creamy in the centre and obviously a tea rose, and Rita is red and pinky centred and obviously a china rose. I do not grow Rita. The plant we labelled "Rita Peterson" is quite common in Brisbane. I know quite a few places where it grows, mostly in older suburbs. There are 3 or 4 plants in a garden in the next block from me, but the people who live there know nothing about the garden.Most of our members could tell you where there are plants near them.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 16 posted 13 OCT 11 by IanM
Comparing the many photos I've seen of "Rita Petersen" with the 'Archduc Charles' in my garden, it seems to me that "Rita Petersen" consistently has some flowers that turn a very dark pink to almost red colour. Furthermore, this becomes a fairly solid colour throughout the flower. My 'Archduc Charles' never gets that intensity of colour. Rather it is typical for each flower to possess two or three shades of pink, with the lowest shade being almost white, and the highest about the colour and intensity of Old Blush. In fact someone once told me that an old name for this rose was "Three Colour China" or "3-in-1 Rose". Furthermore I have never seen flowers of solid deep pink to red on my plant. The flower color is either a fairly solid light pink or variable as I've described above. So I must ask, could this occasional dark, solid flower be a characteristic typical of the clone known as "Rita Petersen", but not typical of 'Archduc Charles'?

I live in Australia and would be interested in some cuttings of "Rita Petersen" to compare with my 'Archduc Charles'.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 16 posted 13 OCT 11 by Patricia Routley
Brent Dickerson lists a pink hybrid china 'A Trois Fleurs' (Three-Flowering Rose), breeder unknown, prior to 1838, in his 'Old Roses: the Master List', 2007, p14.

I have seen the big bush of "Rita Petersen" just once in New Farm Park in Brisbane and cannot comment on the colour. There seemed to be a concensus that "Rita Petersen" and 'Archiduc Charles' were the same rose, but it would be really great if more people could grow them side by side. I note you live in Queensland and perhaps you could contact Bonita Cattell for cuttings. I am sure she will know where to obtain them.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 16 posted 14 OCT 11 by IanM
Thanks Patricia. I've heard it called "Three in One China" or "Three Flowered China" on more than one occasion so this was evidently an old name for it. So it is possible that one of the clones in Australia may actually be 'A Trois Fleurs' (not to be confused with the single-flowered Rubiginosa hybrid by that same name). I notice HelpMeFind does not yet have an entry for the China rose by that name.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 16 posted 5 days ago by HubertG
This is an old thread but I thought it best to post this here. In an old Brisbane newspaper 'The Queenslander' for 26 June, 1909 on page 8 there is a good article on roses and in the paragraph recommending buds for buttonholes I found this reference to "Miss Rita Peterson". It is from "A paper read by Mr. George Watkins at the Queensland Horticultural Society":

"Another Queensland variety may be included in these - namely Miss Rita Peterson, a sport from Penelope."

Of course it may or may not be true, but at least it places this rose at a relatively early date.

I also found this advertisement for "H. A. Petersen Ltd, Seedsman & Nurserymen" (George St, Brisbane) in 'The Daily Mercury' (Mackay, QLD), 13 Oct 1923, page 13:

"ROSE TREES. [ ... ] Petersen's trees are selected for their suitability to the Queensland climate. Grown in the Model Nursery at Kuraby, they come to you clean, healthy and true to name. [ ... ] Here is a choice Collection [ ... ] Miss Rita Petersen (deep rose)."

So it seems that the correct name is "Miss Rita Petersen" , and if it's a sport of 'Penelope' or of some other rose it looks most likely to have originated in their nursery and named after the owner's daughter (I'm guessing).
REPLY
Reply #5 of 16 posted 5 days ago by HubertG
Might it be better to have a separate file for 'Miss Rita Petersen'?

From 'The Brisbane Courier' newspaper, 10 Oct 1908, page 4:

"A New Rose.
The new rose "Penelope" has been well established in many local gardens, and during the present season has developed some excellent blooms. Already another variety has been raised, the credit for which is due to Mr. H. A. Petersen, of Hendra. It is a distinct sport from "Penelope" and has been named "Miss Rita Petersen." Specimens exhibited this week mark it as a fine garden and decorative rose. It is a deep rose colour, shading from cerise to dark red, inner petals coppery; outer petals well curved, shading from lemon cream at base to rich claret towards edge. It is said to be a very profuse flowerer of the tea variety, Its growth is vigorous, its foliage deep green, and it is declared to be free from mildew."
REPLY
Reply #6 of 16 posted 4 days ago by Patricia Routley
I wonder if H. A. Petersen Ld., George St., Brisbane (advertising in 1923) is the same, or connected with
Petersen’s Acacia Florist, Queen Street, (see 1929 reference for both Penelope and “Rita Petersen”).
I have the 1929 catalogue for Petersen’s Acacia Florist but it mentions no other family connected businesses. I note there is also a C. Peterson {sic] (1931 ref) who had a nursery at Kuraby (1923 ref)

I have added the 1908, 1909 and 1929 references to the ‘Rita Petersen’ page.
Mr. Watkins is probably the same man for whom the 1890 tea rose ‘G. W. Watkins’ was named for.

File note more or less for my own clarification.
I believe all ‘Penelope’ in Australia have turned out to be the tea ‘Hugo Roller’.
“Rita Petersen” in Queensland were noted to be the china ‘Archiduc Charles’.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 16 posted 4 days ago by HubertG
Yes, Petersen's nursery and the Acacia florists were the same family. I saw an advert that mentions the Acacia florists by name. I'll find it again.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 16 posted 4 days ago by HubertG
This is from 'The Brisbane Courier', 25 Sep 1926, page 5:

"PUBLIC NOTICE.
Mr. Harry A. Petersen, Mrs. M. E. Petersen, and Miss Rita Petersen, who have been associated with Bermuda Art Florists and Petersen's Seeds Ltd., Queen-street, Brisbane, for many years, have now removed to the Acacia Art Florists in O.K. Building, Queen-st., Brisbane, opp- Chapmans Ltd. Mrs. M. E. Petersen Is head floral artist, assisted by Miss Rita Petersen, and Mr. H. A. Petersen is the manager. For Flowers, Seeds, Plants, and Floral Tributes, Acacia Art Florists offer the most modern service. Country orders' given special attention.
TELEPHONE, CENTRAL 7792..
AFTER OFFICE HOURS, M3897."
REPLY
Reply #9 of 16 posted 4 days ago by Margaret Furness
We need cuttings from the Tea-like Rita Petersen, especially if it is an unstable sport, in which case we might get a true Penelope. The New Farm Park rose garden lost a lot in the flooding a few years ago. I will try to contact IanM , Lionel and Jennie.
REPLY
Reply #11 of 16 posted 2 days ago by Patricia Routley
HubertG, I have scoured my computer and find many reports from Queenslanders who found “Rita Petersen” to be the same rose as ‘Archiduc Charles’. I feel that the Petersen family complimented their daughter on one of the more variable blooms, for which ‘Archiduc Charles’ is known.

Margaret’s thoughts of a “tea-like Rita Petersen” came from my 2010 comment when I thought the bush in New Farm Park looked more tea-like than a china. My impression was quite understandable when one looks at Billy’s 2010 photo no. 160921, and compares it to the miserable chinas growing in my cool climate garden.
REPLY
Reply #12 of 16 posted 2 days ago by HubertG
There are a few scenarios possible here, but I guess they all depend on whether the "Rita Petersen" that looks like 'Archduke Charles' is in fact the original 'Miss Rita Petersen'. How certain is this?
It seems very strange to me that a nurseryman would name a rose after his daughter and say it was a sport of 'Penelope' when it was in fact not that. I think it would have been questioned or noticed at the time had that been the case.
REPLY
Reply #10 of 16 posted 4 days ago by Patricia Routley
Brilliant, HubertG. Now we know who the lady was.
Could we have more input from others on the rose we all saw in Queensland?
Did it end up being the china ‘Archiduc Charles’ (I did note one enterprising person with a pair of nail clippers hovering over the bush)
More info please Margaret on the “tea-like Rita Petersen”.
REPLY
Reply #13 of 16 posted 2 days ago by HubertG
Also, are the centre petals of "Rita Petersen" ever coppery like in the original description of 'Miss Rita Petersen? Or do the outer petals have a "lemon cream" shade at their base?
REPLY
Reply #14 of 16 posted 2 days ago by HubertG
I found an 1888 newspaper article which shows that 'Archduke Charles' was available in Alfred Williams' nursery at Brisbane. This at least establishes that 'Archduke Charles' would have been growing around Brisbane for a long time, but it also makes it looks less likely (in my mind at least) that 'Miss Rita Petersen' was not a sport of 'Penelope' (Alfred Williams' creation) and some sport of 'Archduke Charles'.
There is also an 1889 reference to 'Archduke Charles' being exhibited by Bennett of the Standard Nursery at Homebush, Sydney.

From 'The Queenslander' 19 May 1888:
"Among the Nurseries. By Our Agricultural Reporter.
GREEN HILL, RUNCORN.
Mr. Alfred Williams's nursery is well known for its fruit trees and roses [ ... ] Roses are a speciality at Green Hill, for they are the hobby of the proprietor, and he is constantly obtaining the newest varieties from the Southern colonies and from Europe, over 160 having been thus added to his already numerous collection during the past two years. Among these there were in flower at the time of my visit:— [ ... ] Archduke Charles (hybrid China), a profuse bearer of variegated flowers which open rose colour and gradually change to crimson, often striped with white."
REPLY
Reply #15 of 16 posted 2 days ago by Margaret Furness
The "Tea-like" comment came from Patricia's initial observation. I've been told that the plant at New Farm Park, and others around, match Archduke Charles.
I don't think we should assume that Penelope didn't have a colour sport.
REPLY
Reply #16 of 16 posted 2 days ago by HubertG
I agree, I don't think we can assume that 'Penelope' didn't sport.
I do think that there should be a new separate file for 'Miss Rita Petersen' since we have a date of introduction, breeder and parentage - and leave the "Rita Petersen" as a synonym in the 'Archduke Charles' file for now until more information is available.

Regarding Editor Stewart thinking it was 'General Gallieni' - I found a couple of references in the old newspapers of exhibitions where 'General Gallieni' was shown and where Stewart presided as a judge, so he must have had more than just a passing acquaintance with GG. There's also a vague reference to Stewart sending in a 'catalogue' of the latest roses from Box Hill. It doesn't specifically state Stewart had a nursery but that was the impression I received.
It's hard to imagine someone familiar with 'General Gallieni' mistaking 'Archduke Charles' for it. Just my two cents.
REPLY
most recent 4 days ago SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 12 MAR 18 by HubertG
From 'Dingee Guide to Rose Culture' 1912:

Under "Hardy Everblooming Tea Roses"
"ALBERT STOPFORD: It is superb, like Bon Silene, a vigorous and free bloomer, producing beautiful flowers in great profusion. The color is a very dark crimson-rose."

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dingee_guide_to_rose_culture_-_for_more_than_60_years_an_authority_(1915)_(20767762698).jpg

Page number not listed.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 16 posted 12 MAR 18 by Patricia Routley
Thanks HubertG. Reference added.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 16 posted 12 MAR 18 by HubertG
You're very welcome.

I was actually wondering whether this rose was Vestey's Pink Tea? I know that this rose is listed as identical to General Schablikine, but I grow both and don't see them being the same. VPT is very similar to General Schablikine, but there are enough differences in my mind to know they aren't identical.
Considering Albert Stopford is a seedling of General Schablikine by Papa Gontier, it could fit the bill for Vestey's Pink Tea.

Do you know if Albert Stopford was sold in Australia?
REPLY
Reply #3 of 16 posted 12 MAR 18 by Margaret Furness
An intriguing thought. Could you post side-by-side comparison photos showing receptacle, bud, prickles, leaves, flowers?
REPLY
Reply #4 of 16 posted 12 MAR 18 by HubertG
Sure, the only reservation I have is that my two roses grow in different conditions. My General Schablikine is in the ground and has become huge and my Vestey's Pink is in a large pot and receives a bit less sun. The main differences I discern are in the colour where VPT is consistently less coppery pink than GS and tends to be a brighter carmine more often. The winter flowers are decidedly different with GS being more cupped shaped and VPT more long and of slightly more HT form. At other times of the year the flower form on both is very similar being that shaggy almost pompom look. The fragrance is much the same. GS I think is more prickly, The flower stems on VPT are more often less 'kinky' than GS.
I'll post a few flowers etc for comparison. I don't want to go making any great claims in case they are the same after all.

The best experiment would be to take cuttings from both and give them identical culture to see if what, if any, differences can be discerned. I'll try that.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by Patricia Routley
Provenances?
Have you obtained that book yet?
REPLY
Reply #6 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by HubertG
I've been reading the Tea Rose book online, and plan on putting my hands on a hard copy.

Regarding the provenances I can't be sure without looking up really old cheque butts. I think I bought my General Schablikine from Golden Vale in about 1998. I bought Vestey's Pink Tea at a guess in 2005 after I read about it in Botanica but I can't remember from where. I'll check when I have time.
Here are some photos of buds at about the same stage that I picked today (13/3/18). The colour is hard to capture accurately but GS is a warmer pink and VPT is cooler. The other noticeable difference is that usually VPT displays the long 5th sepal a la Lady Hillingdon, whereas this is rare in GS. This is what made me think that Albert Stopford could be a contender for Vestey's Pink as both Lady Hillingdon and Albert Stopford have Papa Gontier as a parent. The glands on the stem of GS, VPT and Papa Gontier all smell the same too.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by Margaret Furness
Thank you - that's a good start. Colours of potted plants are a problem. I had three gallicas or hybrid gallicas that should have been mauve, but in Nu-earth Premium were pink last spring. I'll have to see what they look like in the ground this year.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by HubertG
I think the best way to compare is to take cuttings from both and grow them in identical mix, pots, fertiliser and sun.
However over the many years I've grown them, there are too many differences for me to currently think they are the same rose.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by Margaret Furness
It's probably still warm enough where you are to try the doggybag technique of taking cuttings now -
see http://heritage.rose.org.au/rose-propagation I use Perlite as aerator now, since the kittylitter formula appears to have changed, and I haven't yet found another that's suitable. Or you could send me cuttings of "Vestey's Pink Tea" if you like, to try in the ground eventually (I've had General Schab in-ground for about 9 years). A couple of Tealadies visit from time to time. Check with quarantine first re sending to SA though. Sending to WA would be better but quarantine is too much of a hurdle.
REPLY
Reply #10 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by HubertG
Thanks, I'll give that technique a go.
REPLY
Reply #11 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by Patricia Routley
......Do you know if Albert Stopford was sold in Australia?

No it was not. It did get to New Zealand, but not Australia. In my garden, both "Vestey's Pink Tea" and 'General Schablikine' are the same.
Your roses may be the same, but you are pushing roses uphill trying to compare a less-sun tea in a pot with a full-sun tea in the ground. In case they are different, to find out which of your roses is the true 'General Schablikine', watch every bloom for that S-bend curve of the consistently bristly pedicel. Then go to work on the other rose keeping 'Mme. Lambard' and 'Monsieur Tillier' in the back of your mind.
REPLY
Reply #12 of 16 posted 13 MAR 18 by HubertG
I do grow the rose that was sold in Australia as "Freiherr von Marschall" (that now seems to be re-identified as Mme Lambard) and my Vestey's isn't that. I grew a Monsier Tillier from Green E's nursery and currently have a Archiduc Joseph from Mistydown's and isn't either of those either. (I don't know if those two roses were correctly identified but they were different in any case). I don't doubt my General Schablikine is the real thing either.

I think it's best to compare cuttings grown in the same conditions. My Vestey's Pink has been moved around in a pot quite a bit and has received more sun at times and it doesn't really change that much. Conversely I have a cutting of General Schablikine growing in a small pot in a shady spot and it still puts out flowers like its parent bush.

My Vestey's Pink rarely shows much kink to the stem like GS does, but that could be cultural. However, I think that long 5th sepal must be genetic, not a cultivational difference. Few tea roses have that.

If someone has incorrectly identified Vestey's Pink Tea as General Schablikine, maybe the nurseries have merged stock and Patricia is comparing two General Schablikines. (?)

I'll let this be for now and report back when I can compare cuttings. Lastly though here are the opening flowers of the two buds I compared yesterday. The biggest noticeable difference is in the colour which is consistently less coppery in Vestey's Pink.
REPLY
Reply #13 of 16 posted 14 MAR 18 by billy teabag
It was our Tea rose study group that noticed "Vestey's Pink Tea" is the same as 'General Schablikine' while we were researching the roses for the Tea rose book. This wasn't done in haste or based on the comparison of single plants.
The roses were growing side by side in the display garden of Melvilles rose Nursery near Perth in the late 1990s and this is where we first noted that they appeared to be the same.
I have a number of quotations on the pinup board behind my computer that I find useful when researching roses and anything else for that matter. One of them is Richard Buckminster Fuller's "You uncover what is when you get rid of what isn’t." and another, this humbling one by the late Trevor Griffiths "Identification is a complex subject. The worst mistake that can be made is that you should assume the name for your particular rose is the correct one and that everyone else is wrong." (from A Celebration of Old Roses p15).

There is always a lot of that about - between the six who researched and wrote the book, we probably had every misnamed Tea rose in the country growing in our gardens so we were very aware of the perils of mislabeling and the difficulties that can arise when sorting out which (and whose) roses are correctly named. To check for the possibility that Melvilles might have a misnamed rose, we ordered roses from a number of interstate nurseries and, in this case, we always received the same rose under the name "Vestey's Pink Tea". 'General Schablikine' was a different matter - apart from 'General Schablikine labelled 'General Schablikine', some nurseries were sending out 'Mons Tillier' as 'General Schablikine' and some sent 'General Gallieni' (and vice versa). We also received "[not] Souvenir d'Un Ami" with a 'General Schablikine' label.

For our book to be useful, we needed to know whether we (ie, East, Central and West Australian gardeners) were growing the same Tea roses under the same names and, if there were discrepancies, to understand what and where they were, and how they come about. So we took every opportunity to visit collections in nurseries and gardens in other states. Of course there were discrepancies - even with the utmost diligence, there are inevitably occasional errors in labeling and once they get into a distribution stream, the errors spread, sometimes quite widely. The good news was that the discrepancies were where they were expected to be, and thanks to information shared by nursery people and rose collectors, for reasons we came to understand.
Rustons Roses, at that time the main supplier of budwood to Australian rose nurseries, had stock plants of both 'General Schablikine' and "Vestey's Pink Tea" and we had the opportunity to examine them closely on a number of visits to the garden in Renmark. 'General Schablikine', like most Teas, varies in bloom form and colour with the seasons and in response to different conditions and rootstocks but at Rustons Roses, as in Melville's Nursery, the roses were undoubtedly the same. After we drew David Ruston's attention to this he watched his plants like a hawk and after a number of years he told us he was in complete agreement.
We were satisfied the roses were the same before publishing the information.
It is always good to have an analytical eye on rose identification work. Thank you for your careful observations and reasoning. I hope you are able to strike cuttings of both your roses and to eventually grow them in the same conditions and that this discussion can continue in the future. With enough time and patience, the roses do give up their answers.
REPLY
Reply #14 of 16 posted 17 JUN 18 by HubertG
From the 'Journal des Roses' 1914, page 165

"Albert Stopford (thé) - Fleur très grande, pleine, uniflore à grands sépales, très grand pétales épais, coloris rose foncé carminé brillant, centre cuivré, pétales exterieurs carmin foncé recourbés gracieusement, bouton allongé, très bien fait, porté par une longue tige, grand feuillage, très fort bois, épines fortes; arbuste très vigoureux, très florifere (odorante). Issue de Général Schablikine et de Papa Gontier."

My translation:
Albert Stopford (Tea) - Flower very large, full, solitary with large sepals, very large thick petals, colour bright dark carmine pink, centre coppery, outer petals dark carmine recurving gracefully, long bud, very well formed, carried on a long stem, grand foliage, very strong wood, strong thorns; bush very vigorous, very floriferous (fragrant). Seedling from General Schablikine by Papa Gontier.

Note: I've translated "grand feuillage" as grand foliage rather than large foliage. Had feuilles (leaves) been used rather than feuillage (foliage) "large" might have made more sense, but I get the impression it means great/grand/good etc foliage, rather than large leaflets. Maybe someone French might correct this.

Also note the interesting description of the large sepals.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From the Rosen-Zeitung 1899, page 29:

"Neuste Rosen für 1899.

Züchter: P. C. Nabonnand

Albert Stopford (Thee). Blume glänzend dunkelkarminrosa, Centrum kupfrig, sehr gross, gefüllt, duftend, einzelständig, langknospig. Pflanze sehr kräftig, sehr wohlr. (Général Schablikine x Papa Gontier)."

My translation:
Newest Roses for 1899.
Breeder: P. C. Nabonnand.
Albert Stopford (Tea). Flower bright dark carmine pink, centre coppery, very large, full, scented, solitary, long-budded. Plant very vigorous, very fine. (General Schablikine x Papa Gontier).


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the Rosen-Zeitung 1899, page 54

"Albert Stopford (Nabonnand) wird durch die grosse, schöne, gefüllte, langknospige Blume ebenso wie durch die hübsche rote Farbe gefallen."

My translation:
Albert Stopford (Nabonnand) will please with its large, beautiful, full, long-budded flower as well as with the pretty red colour.
REPLY
Reply #15 of 16 posted 18 JUN 18 by Patricia Routley
References added. Thanks HubertG
REPLY
Reply #16 of 16 posted 4 days ago by HubertG
I found a 1902 newspaper reference which confirms that 'Albert Stopford' was indeed available in Australia. The South Australian Aldgate Nursery of Smith and Menzel had imported it from England that season.
REPLY
most recent 5 days ago SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 30 DEC 15 by billy teabag
Another reference to the parentage of the Tea rose 'Penelope' appears in The Brisbane Courier, Saturday 28 August 1926, page 5:
"...It is claimed to be a seedling from Madame Lombard; being self-fertilised. Plants of Francis Dubreuil and White Maman Cochet were growing alongside.
Penelope, in its flowers, shows distinct leanings to each of the two last roses, and little at all of Madame Lambard. Madame Lambard is a rose that produces seed freely. The other two varieties seldom produce seed..."

The complete entry has been added to refs.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 9 posted 30 DEC 15 by Patricia Routley
Billy, was there any indication of the author of this article?
REPLY
Reply #2 of 9 posted 31 DEC 15 by billy teabag
It was from a column titled GARDEN NOTES By "HORTILANUS". Should that be added to the ref, and if so, what's the preferred format?
REPLY
Reply #3 of 9 posted 31 DEC 15 by Patricia Routley
Consistency and easy reading is what we should be aiming for.
The preferred format is as shown in most of the 'Penelope' references. ie. Author and Subject on the first line, then text. The author is not needed in the case of a book, But in a newspaper or magazine, we should include this detail if known. We are far more likely to take the word of, e.g. Harry Hazlewood, over Mrs. Patricia Smith of Woop Woop. This is rather important in the case of the 'Francis Dubreuil' reference. I would include "Hortilanus" as author. Someone in the future may know who he was.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 9 posted 25 JUN by HubertG
I've found an article in The Brisbane Courier newspaper of 21 June 1906, page 6, which confirms from the breeder of 'Penelope', Mr. Williams himself, that this rose is in fact a seedling of 'Mme. Lambard'.
It describes a rather crowded monthly meeting of the Queensland Horticultural Society in which 'Penelope' was exhibited. The meeting was attended by Mr. J.F. Bailey, the director of the Brisbane Botanic Gardens, and Mr. J.H. Maiden, the director of the Sydney Botanic Gardens, who was in that region investigating the pest weed of Water Hyacinth, and who also gave a talk. The relevant passage:

"Among the exhibits - all of which were very beautiful, especially the roses - were a new Rose called "The Penelope," which was exhibited by Mr. John Williams, of Mount Gravatt, and a white begonia, shown by Mr. Patterson, of Toowong. Mr. Williams was not able to attend, but he wrote, explaining the origin of the Rose, and stating that he had sold the right to trade in it outside of Australasia to (Peter Henderson and Co., of New York. The rose, he explained, originated from seed of Madame Lambard.
The seed was grown and harvested by him, while on the same spot close by was a Francis Dubreuil, and White Maman Cochets, and he most carefully noted a combination of the two latter colours, and the same prominent guards carried on the flowers as Dubreuil " The rose," he added, "is a good constitution, and extremely floriferous, being always in flower. The latter quality will make it most valuable, and cause it to be much sought after for forcing in pots for cut bloom in climates a little more vigorous than ours in winter. I trust Penelope will be a good advertisement for Queensland for many years to come, and that it will show we are in no way behind Old England in cultivating the national
flower -'the rose.' " "

So it is quite definitive that it is a seedling of 'Mme. Lambard'. The allusions to 'Francis Dubreuil' and 'White Maman Cochet' as pollen parents is purely speculative. So far I haven't been able to find 'Penelope' in any of the Peter Henderson catalogues. It possibly might not have done well in that New York region and was never released, or possibly it was renamed. I'll keep looking.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 9 posted 25 JUN by Nastarana
Cuttings may not have survived transport by ship to the East Coast of the USA.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 9 posted 25 JUN by Patricia Routley
Thank you HubertG. I have changed the parentage from White Maman Cochet x Mme. Lambard to: Mme. Lambard.
As ‘Penelope’ only grew well in Brisbane, it certainly would not have grown in New York.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 9 posted 5 days ago by HubertG
It appears too that 'Penelope' very early on produced a sport in 'Miss Rita Petersen' (see the 1908 newspaper reference).
REPLY
Reply #8 of 9 posted 5 days ago by billy teabag
I love HMF!
Thanks for that HubertG and for all the interesting references you find that deepen and broaden our understanding and our confusion.
I first read the name 'Rita Petersen' or 'Rita Peterson' in the article in the Australian Rose Annual about Editor Stewart going North to Queensland, where he made special mention of seeing his old friend 'General Gallieni' there under the name 'Rita Petersen'. It did not occur to me for a moment that Editor Stewart might have been mistaken and we quoted the Editor with great confidence.
Some years later we were delighted to see that the collection of Heritage Roses at New Farm Park in Brisbane listed 'Rita Petersen' so when visiting for the HRIA conference in 2010, we descended on the garden expecting to see 'General Gallieni'. Well it most certainly wasn't, but we did recognise another old friend - 'Archduke Charles' - or, at least, one of the roses circulated as 'Archiduke Charles' - there have been at least two different roses sold under that name in Australian nurseries.
So did Editor Stewart get it wrong? Was 'General Gallieni' more an acquaintance than a friend and was there only a passing resemblance, or has another rose assumed the name since then?
And now I read that 'Miss Rita Peterson' is her own person - said to be a sport of 'Penelope'.
It's a great reminder to be a little circumspect about everything we read.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 9 posted 5 days ago by HubertG
You're very welcome, Billy. And I love HMF too!
As you say, at the very least we now know that 'Miss Rita Petersen' is its own legitimately named variety. I'd like to comment more on it but might wait until she receives her own file.
REPLY
© 2019 HelpMeFind.com