|
|
'Mrs. Marshall Field' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Does anyone have access to the Sunday, November 3, 1907, issue of a newspaper called (in full or in part, I don't know) the Tribune (likely the Chicago Tribune)? According to The Gardeners' Magazine of November 30, 1907, the Tribune on that date had a full page color picture of the rose 'Mrs. Marshall Field'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
19 MAR 24 by
 Lee H.
|
Here is the article. I can’t tell if it was in color or not. It was digitized in b/w.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 3 posted
19 MAR 24 by
odinthor
|
Many thanks! Supposedly it's in color.
|
REPLY
|
|
I’ve moved the b/w out of Comments and into the main page for Mrs. Marshall Field.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
"Bright rosy pink flowers, with long leafy stems, and a fragrance equal to that of American Beauty are its principal characteristics," from American Florist, vol. 27, 1906, p. 737.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
"The robust bush gives an abundance of flowers borne on a rigid stem, giving it preference for making bouquets. The color of the flower is deep pink within, paling lightly at the moment of fully opening" JR32/182 (Journal des Roses, 1908).
|
REPLY
|
|
Reference and colour added. Thank you.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
"Peter Reinberg will next season have seven houses planted to Mrs. Marshall Field roses. The additional room given this section has been taken from the new American Beauty range" [in the Reiner greenhouses], American Florist, vol. 28, 1907, p. 504.
Reinberg--a mass producer of cut roses with acres of greenhouses, one of the largest such operations in the world at the time, always adding more and more greenhouses--specialized (though not exclusively) in 'American Beauty'. As Reinberg was neither a rose breeder nor a nurseryman per se, I suspect strongly that 'Mrs. Marshall Field' was not a bred rose but rather a sport of 'American Beauty' (which is why Reinberg would feel moved to put the two under the same culture).
|
REPLY
|
|
