Area 4E – Notes.
In this area the labels were for a time fixed to posts in the ground. This has been discontinued and some have a label on a post as well as one hanging in the bush.
‘Daintrie Sievers’. Described as having a double centre or waratah form, whereas this is a formal double, so almost certainly wrong. The bush at 4A-011 was supposedly propagated from this one, so will also be wrong.
‘Edith Linton’. Described as semi-double silvery pink, so wrong. This bush has flowers of various colours. It is also completely different from the plant of the same name at 4A-018. Possibly same as 4F-012.
‘Elizabeth Cole’. Described as irregular double, peony form, 12-15 near orbiculate petals; so room for doubt, this being a formal double.
‘Gay Time’. This looks virtually identical to ‘Yesterday’ at 9-028 and not all that like the picture of ‘Gay Time’ in Trehane or on various websites. On the other hand, the plant of ‘Yesterday’ at 2D-016 is different again and probably correct, so maybe 9-028 and 4E-004 are correct.
There are two plants labelled ‘Odoratissima’ but they are quite different from each other. I believe 4E-009 to be correct and I think 4E-010 may be ‘Incense’, a variety growing in another Cornish collection, but not in the register. 4E-009 has little or no scent, 4E-010 has a strong and not especially pleasant scent, somewhat medicinal.
‘Otahuhu Beauty’. This plant is mostly in very poor health with very yellow leaves. There is a side branch from low down which appears healthy and true to type so in time the rest may be cut away.
‘Rose Bouquet’. This was a repeat of the confusion at 4A-035, an identical plant. This is not Camellia japonica ‘Pink Bouquet’, it is C. x williamsii ‘Rose Bouquet’ and has now been relabelled accordingly.
‘Somersby’ is described in the register as rose form double to peony form, while this is formal double until it has been open for some time, when a few stamens appear in the centre.
‘Spencer’s Pink’ was cut down in 2016 because it was all but dead. Close examination of the stump suggested that honey fungus was the probable cause of its long, slow decline. There is another plant of it in the collection at 4A-041.
‘Swan Lake’. The Register describes thefoliage of this variety as having the fine serration and distinct venation of a typical x williamsii. I would have said this was more likely to be a japonica. There is a ‘Swan Lake’ (Monrovia), which is an American japonica variety.