'La Vie' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
Initial post
12 FEB 19 by
 Patricia Routley
|
I wonder if there ever was a rose called ‘Victor Groshens. Because of the 1934 reference wherein Plant Patent No. 5 was said to be for ‘La Vie’, it seems to me as though ‘Victor Groshens’ should be deleted, after merging with ‘La Vie’?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
13 FEB 19 by
jedmar
|
The Plant Patent 5 and the 1934 ARA reference belongs to 'La Vie', not 'Victor Groshens'. The latter name is based only on the scant Information of the great-grandchild (note on the breeder listing). It could be that this patent was actually for 'La Vie'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
13 FEB 19 by
Patricia Routley
|
Yes. The Plant Patent was certainly for ‘La Vie’ (I am ploughing my way through the early Patents). I will delete ‘Victor Groshens’. Thanks Jedmar.
|
REPLY
|
| 
