April U, 1865. ] 



JOURNAL OF HOETICUIiTUKE AND COTTAGE OAEDENER. 



28 9 



One advantage you will derive is the uniform depth of your 

 beds under each span, so that the light will play on both 

 aides alike. Three feet in depth will be ample, with pipes 

 below for heating, whether you use plunging material or 

 soil, and provided the pipes are not far from the pots we do 

 not think it matters what you cover them with. We should 

 think three pipes in each bed ample. 



2. The side walls, brick 3 feet and glass 2 feet, being 5 feet, 

 the height to the apex 8 feet, and the height to the gutter 

 between the ridges 5 feet, a tall man could not walk up- 

 right even along yonr central pathways. They ought to be 

 at least a foot more in height, and the apex or ridges in 

 proportion. This will necessitate a greater surface of glass, 

 and thus so far interfere with your calculations. It would 

 be premature to say anything as to how the house and roof 

 are to be braced, &c., but stout side walls are a great advan- 

 tage in this respect. 



3. In your plan. No. 3, there would be more glass for the 



space exposed to the direct action of the wind ; and though 

 piercing winds teU much in cooling the glass they come 

 but seldom, whilst in cold and frosty weather there is a 

 continual radiation of heat, unless when a bright sun is 

 shining on it, and then the heat inside will be more equable 

 in proportion to the amount of atmospheric air enclosed. 

 The ridge in No. 3 might also be a foot lower without detri- 

 ment. If the central pathway were 31 feet, as in No. 1, and 

 the addition put to the beds, you would have nearly 100 feet 

 more. By making two spans of the roof of No. 3, it would 

 be just the same as the half of No. 1, and the side walls 

 would give strength to the structure. You certainly gain 

 in your proposed arrangement of one large house, in saving 

 one pathway. So far as radiation of heat is concerned, the 

 mere form of the roof enclosing a similar space is of but 

 little consequence. 



4. If such a large house were to be entirely filled with 

 fruiting plants about the same stage, we could see no ob- 



I'tiFT 



Plan No. 2. 



jeotion to it ; but if different beds contained plants in different 

 stages of growth, we would rather prefer being able to give 

 them different treatment as respects temperature and at- 

 mospheric moisture. In such a case the hipped lean-to of 

 No. 2, or the span or rather double span-roof of No. 3, with 

 several divisions in the 100-feet length, would please us 

 better. That is no reason, however, why you should not 

 carry out your own proposed plan. 



5. Some thirty years ago we helped to manage a house 

 for Vines and Pines very much the same as your section of 



No. 3, only it was some 3 feet higher at the apex, and the 



central path was elevated so as to be about 1 foot below the 

 stone curb of the Pine-beds. The Vines were brought in 

 below the wall plate at each side. The house was heated 

 by a iiue on each side, and also by another beneath the 

 central pathway. The side flues were only worked in severe 

 weather in winter, for fear of starting the Vines. When 

 the Vines were started all were put in action. The house 

 was kept at very nearly 60° by means of the centre flue, 

 bottom heat being given by tan, and Pines did well as sue- 







100 FT 









3 









7 





I- 









k. 







^ * 







■ - - ■ 



7 







_ 



3 



_ 



No. 3. — Gbouhd Plak. 



cessions, and fine Grapes were also obtained. Hot water 

 was just then becoming popular. The gardener was cele- 

 brated as a Pine grower, but rarely or never did the fruiting 

 Pines in a low house like No. 2, have 90° from artificial heat 

 in winter. A rise from sun heat was a different affair. We 

 certainly would not have kept such a house, as section No. 3, 

 at 90", in such weather as we have lately had ; but in vei-y 

 cold nights we would have been satisfied with 20° or even 

 30° less. We should hesitate to give any plants 90° for a 

 continuance, or as a standard, in dark winter weather. 



6. With these hints and modifications kept in mind, we 

 have no doubt that No. 1 and No. 3 altered will answer 

 well, especially where coals are cheap and good. On the 

 other hand, we think that old-fashioned No. 2 is rather 

 summarily dismissed, especially on the question of cost. 

 We presume this refers to the eight-feet wall at the back, 

 though that might be lower. First cost is not always a loss. 

 In cold districts, and where fuel from carriage is expensive, 

 .?uch a house would be decidedly the most economical. If 



partly sunk — say 2 feet under the ground level, it would 

 be less exposed to the wind. If on high ground in these 

 circumstances we would even dispense with the hip roof at 

 the back, and have all the glass facing the south, or have 

 only a short hip for gaining room, and lessening the height 

 of the wall. The front path shown is very useful, but with 

 double sashes for the width, that path might be dispensed 

 with, and all from the pathway to the front wall turned into 

 a bed, and the front rows be looked to from the outside. 

 This, with a 3i-feet pathway, would increase the amount 

 of available space in the bed by fuUy 3 feet, making it 10 

 instead of 7. Such a house, especially if sunk a Uttle, could 

 be more easily kept at a moist heat when necessary, than a 

 house glass on all sides. In such a low house without a 

 front path, so far as we recollect, very fine Pines were 

 grown at Trentham. The question as to first cost in such 

 houses is of less importance than the advantage of abun- 

 dant light from glass on all sides, and as that will be affected 

 by the after-consumption and cost of fuel. — K. F.] 



