Notes

‘Alba Grandiflora’ (5C-001) This is a name that has been used as a synonym for ‘Gauntlettii’ so I need to compare it with the plant of that variety in the collection.

‘Augusto Leal de Gouveia Pinto’ (5C-002) is clearly something else entirely, possibly ‘Adolphe Audusson’.

‘Campsii Alba’ (5C-003) is the same as 5B-004 but different from 5D-004, which as noted under section 5D notes, seems closer to the Register description.

‘Dona Jane Andresen’ (5C-006 & 5C-007), is the correct rendering of this name.

‘Fanny’ (5C-008) looks like a sasanqua, in spite of the label saying japonica. I have not seen it flower. Both a japonica and a sasanqua are listed in the Register.

‘Madame de Cannart d’Hamale’ (5C-017) is described in the register as an even pale pink with white margin and centre band of light salmon pink. This has no white margin and a central white stripe. It appears to be the same as ‘Myrtifolia’ at 4D-021, a variety which arose as a sport of ‘Madame de Cannart d’Hamale’ and should be deep pink to red. Presumably it has reverted to its parent’s form, but again it has no white margin and the centre stripe is white.

‘Perfecta’ (5C-023 & 5C-024) appear to be plants of a variety raised by Les Jury and sent, un-named, to a nursery in the UK for trialling. It was named ‘Perfecta’, invalidly both because there was already a variety of the same name and also because “latinised” cultivar names are not allowed. It is now listed in the Register as ‘Perfecta’ (Jury) and is a williamsii hybrid.

‘Rafia’ (5C-028) is supposed to be cherry red, but that may be a fanciful nursery description. It is also supposed to be a sport of ‘Princess Bacciochi’, with which I will compare it.

‘Visconti Nova’ (5C-029) should be a deep red formal double splotched and streaked white. This is wrong but I don’t know what it actually is.