August 10, 1882. ] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 119 
10 th 
Til 
11th 
F 
12 th 
S 
Alexandra Palace Gladioli Show. 
13th 
SUN 
10th Sunday after Trinity. 
14th 
M 
15th 
Tu 
Clay Cross, Witney, and Plymouth Shows. 
16th 
W 
Shrewsbury Show. Two days. 
GLASS COPINGS FOR GARDEN WALLS. 
HE walls surrounding the kitchen garden here 
are particularly good, being generally about 
12 feet high, very substantial, and, considering 
their age, exactly a century, are in excellent 
preservation. Altogether, reckoning both 
( iNLJ’jr sides, a length of 1060 yards are utilised for 
fruit trees ; but of this extent of walls no aspect 
or space occupied proves half so remunerative as 
the 36 yards devoted to Apricots. This is entirely 
owing to a glass coping with the usual blinds or cur¬ 
tains being affixed. There is no mistaking this fact, as on the 
same south wall, the warmest in the garden, there is a large 
tree unprotected as far as copings are concerned, and other 
good trees on south-east and western aspects, which only occa¬ 
sionally produce fruit, while those under the coping have never 
failed since it was affixed five years ago. 
The great value of the coping lies not so much in the fact 
of its being a sure protection at the blooming period, as it is 
quite possible to protect nearly as well during an average spring 
with doubled fish nets, mats, hay or straw bands, Spruce Fir 
branches, or other available material, but in the almost certain 
ripening of the growth. We must first secure the bloom, and 
then protection is a simple matter. How many employers or 
gardeners could during last season, without the aid of glass, 
boast of having gathered bushels of fine Apricots ? The same 
thing occurred with a few branches of the tree before mentioned 
as adjoining the protected trees, these extending about 4 feet 
under the coping. On these protected branches were developed 
more blooms, and eventually more fruits, than all the rest of 
the tree—by no means a small specimen. 
I may be in error in ascribing the superior floriferousness of 
the protected trees to the more perfect ripening of the growth, 
as it is quite possible the protection afforded during the winter 
by the coping may have resulted in the transformation of many 
wood buds into fruit buds. If this is possible, as suggested by 
“ Irish Rector ” (page 442, last volume) in the case of Plums 
and other fruits, it is equally possible and extremely probable 
in the case of Apricots. During the whole of the winter of 
1880 and 1881 the glass was not removed from the iron frame¬ 
work, but last autumn I had it all taken down and packed in 
the cases provided for that purpose. This spring we had 
abundance of blooms on the trees under the coping, but the 
blooms were equally as plentiful on all the unprotected trees. 
The winter being unusually mild it is very probable the glass, 
had it not been removed, would not have materially affected 
the buds, but next winter I hope to test the advisability of 
removing or retaining the glass. Unfortunately its retention 
is apt to encourage red spider during the autumn and to ward 
off the rain from the border at the base of the wall. It is here 
where many unprotected fruit trees suffer, as it is seldom suffi¬ 
cient moisture reaches this position ; and when it is stated the 
coping in our case abuts 3 feet from the wall it will be easily 
understood it is absolutely necessary to continue to water the 
trees till late in the season or remove the glass. Thanks to 
our improved arrangements for a good water supply, we can 
and do easily administer it whenever required, and the engine 
after the fruit is picked will check the red spider. At the 
same time I should greatly prefer the latest invention in the 
w 7 ay of copings. In this case the glass is fixed to a revolving 
framework, thus rendering it an easy matter to admit or ex¬ 
clude moisture, being in addition a most undoubted improve¬ 
ment on the laborious practice of taking out and storing and 
returning the glass, and removes the only objection I have 
ever heard urged against glass copings. 
Another advantage attending the use of copings, and this is 
very apparent at the present time, is the effect it has upon the 
ripening and quality of the fruit. Directly under the coping 
we pick our earliest fruit, and this season,owing to the absence 
of sunshine, they are clearer in colour and altogether better 
than the rest of the tree. According to my experience a mini¬ 
mum amount of sunshine does not result in absence of colour 
in Apricots or Peaches ; on the contrary, the former are un¬ 
usually red, while the Peaches under glass were never better 
coloured than during this season. Given plenty of light and 
heat, the latter artificial if you will, and highly yet naturally 
coloured well-flavoured fruit can be insured. This brings me 
to another part of my subject. The question has been asked 
before, and I repeat it, Why build expensive brick or stone 
garden walls when it is possible to secure more satisfactory 
returns at a less expense ? These great expensive walls after 
all will not insure crops of fruit, whereas if a few heated or 
unheated glass houses were built, or even “glass walls ” with 
copings w r ere substituted, valuable crops of fruit of the most 
delicious quality could almost of a certainty be relied on. 
Take Pears, for instance. How often does our climate'greatly 
assist in the production of fruit of the best quality on the open 
walls ? Last autumn I saw and tasted a considerable number 
of Pears, these being growm in presumably favoured districts, 
but in no one case did I discover any fruit to equal either in 
appearance or quality those grown by an enthusiastic pomolo- 
gist on pyramids in an unheated span-roofed glass structure. 
It is true trees of any description grown entirely under glass 
must receive almost unlimited supplies of water, and which is 
not forthcoming in many gardens. At the same time there 
are hundreds of places where the employers, by a moderate 
original outlajq could easily overcome this difficulty. 
I am not in a position to contrast the respective costs of 
walls or houses, but I may safely assert the latter is the least 
costly. To build a substantial wall of the necessary height— 
not 8 or 9 feet high, as is too often the case, but nearer 12 feet 
—owing to the amount of labour involved, is a very expensive 
affair ; whereas in this age of machinery and competition glass 
structures can be cheaply and yet well built. The lights could 
be made to unhinge, revolve, or slide off, according to the 
design of the house, this insuring a moist border and clean 
foliage at a time when the reverse is often the case—viz., after 
the crops are perfected. The lights being replaced the house, 
whether heated or unheated, could be utilised for various pur- 
No. 111.—Vol. V, Third Series. 
N®. 1767.—TOL. LXVII1 OLD SERIES. 
