February i6, 1882 . ] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 125 
16th 
Tn 
Iloyal Society at 4.S0 P.H. Linnean Society at 8 P.M. 
17th 
F 
18th 
S 
19th 
Sun 
Quinquagesima. 
20th 
M 
21st 
TU 
22nd 
W 
Society of Arts at 8 P.M. 
THE EFFECTS OF GAS ON PLANTS. 
N the Journal, page 114, there is an account of 
the damage caused by gas to the plants at 
South Kensington. This is doubtless correct, 
and, as you say, “ it is a pity that the expe¬ 
rience gained " elsewhere was not acted upon 
here, or rather possibly that it was overborne 
by the assertions of those who pressed for the 
application in this form. The fault was not so 
'fSp* much in allowing gas to be used in the conservatory as 
' in the manner it was carried out. I was there during 
the Exhibition twice, and was struck by the faulty arrange¬ 
ments and the great heat in the evening. One-third the num¬ 
ber of these powerful burners would have lighted the place 
very well indeed, and with upper ventilation on while alight 
little if any injury would have resulted from this cause. In¬ 
stead of that there was an almost dazzling brilliancy, exceed¬ 
ing in some respects the electric light, and the place was un¬ 
duly heated owing to the usual closing of the ventilators. 
These were faults enough (excess of light and heat, and defi¬ 
cient ventilation), but they were aggravated by the hundreds 
of yards of common indiarubber tubing suspended about in 
festoons, graceful or otherwise, and this of itself I am sure 
would have caused half the damage if there had not been more 
than three lamps alight. I know by experience that this 
tubing after being in use a week will become saturated with 
gas, and if there is a good pressure of gas behind it will give 
off poisonous fumes into the room where used. This uncon- 
sumed gas is the most dangerous to plant life ; and as this 
tubing is often sulphurous from its manufacture, this, too, 
would do damage. 
The mere burning of the gas would not injure anything in a 
large place like this with due attention to ventilation, tempe¬ 
rature, and moisture, if the funnels from lamps had had con¬ 
densing attachments, or been all connected and taken outside. 
It must be remembered, too, that there was free passage into 
this place of the dangerous fumes of the anthracite coal burn¬ 
ing in adjoining corridors, as was evident to the olfactory 
nerves on leaving the purer air of the conservatory ; and 
though the arcades are draughty enough, the draughts during 
most of the time tended upwards towards the highest point, 
and met from both sides in the conservatory, to say nothing of 
the contamination of the ordinary atmosphere from the scores 
of chimneys all round. 
The vapours given off during the burning of gas (except the 
carbonic acid) are easily condensed, consisting as they do of 
sulphurous acid, ammonia, and other impurities most injurious 
to plant life (see p. 115 for its effects on trees), and from the 
5800 feet of gas named as burnt daily, 3000 ounces of liquid 
could have been condensed with proper appliances, and only 
the carbonic acid (which is incondensable and not so hurtful 
to plants) would have escaped. If the truth was known, this 
quantity of liquid—about twenty gallons !—was as much, if 
not more, than the leaves of the plants obtained from other 
sources ; and what a food to expect them to live on! 
This experience, unfortunately, will be considered quite suffi¬ 
cient to set at rest any lingering doubts as to the danger of 
gas for lighting conservatories ; but it does not really prove 
anything beyond the fact that some plants are much more 
sensitive to its effects than others, and I have not the slightest 
doubt (from observations elsewhere) that these same plants 
would have been greatly injured by the other fumes and con¬ 
stant draughts if there had not been a single gas jet. Strictly 
speaking, no precaution was taken against this danger, and it 
is therefore no criterion for general judgment ; but, consider¬ 
ing the importance of some simple means of heating and light¬ 
ing conservatories so as to render them enjoyable when pro¬ 
fessional or business men return from their daily duties, it 
would he a very good thing if the Royal Horticultural Society 
would institute some careful and reliable trial in small houses 
with ordinary (and a few more sensitive) plantp, and then 
publish the results. A private individual doing -this and re¬ 
porting favourably is often looked upon as a means of cheaply 
advertising some particular stove. Such practical tests as these 
are quite consistent with the Society's work, as is also the larger 
question of hot-water heating, and quite as useful to the com¬ 
munity at large as giving prizes and certificates for the finest 
Auricula or the best collection of fruits. For, after all, how 
would these wonderful flowers and fruits be raised if there 
were no means available for obtaining artificial heat readily ? 
The horticultural engineer may in this respect be compared to 
the organ-blower in the old story, and say, “ We did it,” will¬ 
ingly allowing the organist’s credit to the gardener.—B. W. 
Warhurst. _ 
The destruction that has resulted from Messrs. Siemens' 
display of improved gas burners in the conservatory of the 
Royal Horticultural Society has not been overstated on page 114. 
The experience there gained has been dearly purchased by the 
loss of many fine plants, and the only counterbalancing (id- 
vantage that suggests itself is that the system, if applied to 
large halls insufficiently ventilated, would be equally injurious 
to human beings, and it is better to kill plants than people. It 
would be interesting to know, however, whether the actual 
burning of the gas has caused all the injury in this case. It is 
conceivable, to say the least, that the several yards of gutta 
percha tubing through which the gas was conducted contri¬ 
buted to the damage that has been done. In the manufacture 
of this tubing much sulphur is used, and anyone may detect its 
presence by applying a piece of new tubing to the nostrils. 
As sulphur in some form or other has presumably been the most 
active agent in the destruction that has been wrought, this 
aspect of the question appears to be worthy of some con¬ 
sideration. 
It seems probable that the chief destructive agents have 
been sulphurous acid and carburetted hydrogen gases, the 
former being derived from the combustion, and the latter 
from any unconsumed ordinary gas which escaped into the 
building either from the junctions of the tubing being insecure 
or otherwise. Sulphurous acid gas is known to be highly in - 
NO. fi6,—VOL. IV, THIRD SERIES. 
No. 1742.— Vol. EXV1I., Old Series. 
