288 



JOURNAL OF HOKTICULTUBE AND COTTAGE GAEDENEE. 



[ October 10, 1872. 



closely-packed branches. It promises to become a large tree 

 ■whilst its Fern-like foliage is very graceful. 



Betinospoka obtusa, planted at the same time as the last- 

 named, is 10 feet high, consequently it is a less rapid grower ; 

 in fact, I expect it will hardly emerge out of the shrub condition, 

 but it is very graceful. 



Betinospora leptoclada. — A dwarf mountain tree, seemingly 

 well adapted for a permanent place in a geometric garden. 

 About 2 feet high is the total altitude attained in some half- 

 dozen years. B. squarrosa is of a rich glaucous hue, but its 

 growth seems more iu a lateral than horizontal direction, so that 

 I fear it must also be classed amongst the shrubs. 



Thujopsis boeealis, 23 feet high, planted 1860, is a handsome 

 hardy species of the darkest green hue. It is also of quick 

 growth, and I believe is regarded as more hardy than many 

 native trees. In outline it is a slender cone with a distinct 

 leader, and is altogether a plant that ought to be in every 

 collection. 



Thujopsis dolabeata. — Upwards of 6 feet high, and promis- 

 ing to go on ; planted in 1866. This tree is not by any means a 

 quick grower, but it may, perhaps, like some of the Piceas, 

 make up afterwards for the tardy growth of its early days. It 

 seems to be quite hardy, and the specimen alluded to is starting 

 with a decided leader ; but two or three others we have seem 

 unwilling to emerge out of the bush form. I do not yet despair 

 of this specimen taking a good position. The distinctness of this 

 species entitles it to cultivation, and if it will only grow fast 

 enough it will be very handsome. 



Thuja Lobbi, planted 1860, is now 35 feet high, straight and 

 tapering as a fishing-rod. It is certainly one of the finest, if 

 not the very best, of the Conifers introduced of late years, com- 

 peting, in my opinion, with the Wellingtonia in that respect, 

 with a handsome foliage, equalling many of the choicest Ferns 

 in the manner it gracefully droops over horizontally, differing 

 from the generality of the Arbor- Vita? section, whose foliage 

 stands in a somewhat stiff vertical position. It also confines 

 itself to a single leader, which rises perfectly upright, giving 

 the plant the tapering spiral form so different from most other 

 trees. The diameter of the specimen noted is not more than 

 8 feet at its widest part, and no one could wish it stouter, as 

 there is no lack of branches the whole way up. We have 

 Several other trees smaller than the above, all of the same 

 character, and occupying different positions, but all alike good. 

 Might I ask if anyone has a taller tree of this species than that 

 referred to ? I consider it identical with T. Menziesii, but the 

 species named T. gigantea is with me a much inferior species, 

 and certainly improperly named. 



Libocedeus chilensis, 17 feet high, planted in 1858, is a 

 pretty-growing species, but not destined to become a large tree, 

 as the specimen here was injured in the winter of 1866-67. Its 

 graceful form and silvery-grey appearance, nevertheless, en- 

 title it to attention; but where only a limited number of 

 Conifers are grown this one cannot compete with either of the 

 two last named, its lack of hardiness being sadly against it. 



Araucaria i3ibeicata. — Planted about 1830, now 34 feet high, 

 a fine tree, has borne cones for several years, but few of the 

 seeds good, owing to the absence of the male plant ; yet one of 

 the latter having coned last year, I am in hopes of having some 

 perfected seed. The tree here is more cylindrical than conical 

 in outline, with a rounded top ; the leader, however, is perfect 

 in every sense. I think the site is rather too dry, as it has lost 

 some of its lower limbs ; nevertheless, it is a fine tree, and has 

 never appeared to have suffered in the least from hard winters. 

 We have other trees also good, but smaller. 



Wellingtonia gigantea, planted 1S60, is now 31} feet high 

 and 25 feet in diameter; it occupies a very exposed position, 

 which this tree seems well suited for, as we have some others 

 planted-out singly in the park also doing well. I do not give 

 the height of the above as anything remarkable, as there are 

 many higher; we lost our- best specimen in 1868 when 27 feet 

 high. The tree first referred to has hitherto been in the best 

 possible health, but the death of the 27-feet specimen has left an 

 unpleasant notion that others may also die ; still I cannot per- 

 ceive any tokens of disease among them, though they are upwards 

 of one hundred in number, exclusive of small ones. Ihope, there- 

 fore, there is no danger of our largest specimen dying at an early 

 age from constitutional debility. Nothing possibly can be more 

 healthy than the general character of most of the trees we 

 have ; an avenue of forty specimens, planted in 1866, contains 

 some upwards of 20 feet high. I may add that the whole of the 

 specimens present the same correct conical outline, with now 

 and then one a little less in diameter at the surface than it is 

 2 feet up, forming a sort of bulbous cone. I have only noticed 

 one amongst the many trees we have as producing cones, and 

 that one has done so for many years. The Wellingtonia is 

 certainly one of the fastest-growing trees we have, not so 

 rapidly attaining height as Thuja Lobbi, but exceeding it 

 and all others in the formation of bole, which, in point of 

 thickness at the bottom, far exceeds that of any other tree that 

 I know, and tapering gradually up becomes in itself no bad 



representation of a cone. Its thickness at the bottom cer- 

 tainly unfits it for the many purposes for which poles are 

 applied; but, on the other hand, it certainly enables the plant 

 to withstand any amount of wind, for the single trees we have 

 of it do not seem in the least affected by their exposure. Of the 

 quality of its timber little need be said, but as time goes on 

 we shall see whether it be found capable of withstanding the 

 changes our climate is liable to. Let us hope such will not be 

 the case. 



In drawing these notes to a close I may observe that the 

 present season seems to be with Conifers the most unfruitful of 

 any I remember, as we have comparatively few in fruit, except- 

 ing such as those on which the cones hang more than one year. 

 Amongst the latter class is the Araucaria, which has a number 

 of cones bursting at the present time ; but I am not at all sorry 

 at their non-bearing, for I cannot but think the early fruiting 

 of Conifers is a token of debility, and I fear such trees will 

 not attain a great age. I should have been more pleased had 

 Thuja Lobbi, Thujopsis borealis, and some of the Betinosporas, 

 not been fruited so early. I am glad our fine Picea Pinsapo has 

 only once produced cones, and the Deodars not at all, excepting 

 the male catkins. Some growers speak with exultation of their 

 trees bearing fruit, but I look at it in quite another light, and 

 would like to see the tree attain a large size before it commenced 

 to bear. 



Having carried these remarks to a much greater length than 

 was intended, I cannot, however, conclude without joining 

 with Mr. Fleming in paying a tribute to Mr. Frost's long-con- 

 tinued skill and industry in bringing together and managing so 

 well the large collection for which Dropmore is so famous. I 

 hope, whenever the worthy pioneer of Conifer cultivation retires 

 with his laurels, there will not be wanting those who will feel 

 they are only performing a duty to their calling in recognising his 

 labours in some becoming way. From Mr. Fleming's remarks, 

 I am glad to find that something of the kind is intended, as no 

 one, certainly, is better entitled to a hearty greeting than the 

 energetic planter and manager of so much that is good at Drop- 

 more, and the envy of a large portion of the gardening com- 

 munity. — J. Eobson. 



DOUBLE GLAZING. 



In answer to " J. M." and others, I must reply that my 

 own experience of this has been limited — too limited to warran 

 me in advising you to adopt it with all your houses ; better try 

 a part first. At one time I did a" good deal with double 

 sashes, and in cold weather I found that we gained from 

 5° to 10° in temperature over the single sash ; but to do this 

 it was necessary to do something more than place one sash on 

 the top of the other. I placed broad list on the top and 

 sides of the under sash, and thus air was excluded. In the 

 open space in front I also had a waterproof roll to close the 

 opening between the sashes there. Double glazing — that is, 

 the planes of glass from 3 to 4 inches apart, will in any case 

 be an advantage as respects temperature, but it will act most 

 effectually when little or no air circulates in the space between 

 the glass. There is not so much advantage when the air- 

 passes freely from front to back in the enclosed space. In 

 double glazing such a large roof as yours, the outer glass should 

 be in sashes and moveable, otherwise, if not very close, the 

 under glass might become dirty and could not be easily cleaned. 

 If the glass of both inside and outside roofs were kept clean, 

 as far as a limited experience goes the double roof with clear- 

 glass will not affect the ripening of the fruit. I twice used 

 double sashes for a Vine pit, and the Grapes ripened well. I 

 adopted it to secure heat. I am not personally aware of any 

 case where a double roof was dispensed with when the glass 

 could be kept clean. 



In a conservatory double glazing would help you, more espe- 

 cially if the conservatory was small, and there was a good fire 

 in the dining room, with the glass door left open. — B. F. 



[The object our correspondents have in view is the exclusion 

 of cold, so as to save fuel now that coals have so far advanced 

 in price. We shall be obliged by any of our readers stating; 

 then- experience on this. — Eds.] 



BOILEES AT THE BOYAL HORTICULTURAL 

 SOCIETY'S BIBMINGHAM EXHIBITION. 

 No. 3. 

 In continuing our notes on the horticultural boilers we come 

 next to the saddles, and modifications of the saddle, and we 

 will take them in the order in which they are placed in the 

 catalogue. 



First comes Stand 47, Mr. Frederick Mee, Smithdown Eer.cl, 

 Liverpool. He showed three double saddle boilers of differ<ufc 



