February 15, 1883 . ] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
137 
culture. At the time I am writing of there were no East Lothian or 
Giant Ten-week Stocks ; but, fine as they are, they cannot be com¬ 
pared with the Brompton Stocks of fifty years ago.—E. L. 
HORTICULTURAL BUILDINGS. 
“R. P. B.” and Mr. Warhurst have both nibbled at a subject on 
which information is undoubtedly wanted both by gardeners and 
their employers. When we are told that a gardener fails to grow 
Eucharis or Dendrobiums in an old house, and that in a new 
house he succeeds, we are prone to ask, What was it that was 
wrong with the old structure ? The fact is, too much has been 
made of the construction of houses, the exact pitch of the roof, 
the height, width, &c., and far too little of internal arrangements. 
Far too much has been made of the peculiarities of this house and 
of that, instead of studying other conditions altogether. The 
truth is that when a change of house secures success when only 
failure was gained before, there is little credit to the man, for it 
shows that his success or failure depends altogether on accidental 
circumstances. Far be it from me to underrate the importance of 
having properly constructed houses, or ignoring the fact that 
some houses are quite unfit for the purpose for which they were 
erected, and far be it from me to blame when it is not due ; but 
frequently a new man will do as well as a new house, and when 
failure comes it is a poor apology to say “it is the house,” or 
Fig. 42 .—Caetota excelsa. 
grudge a successful man his due meed of praise by attributing his 
success to “ the house.” Last spring a gardener was shown some 
thriving Orchids. “ It is the house,” was the remark. He himself 
had the same species, and when asked, “ What is wrong with this 
and the other thing, they are doing badly with you ? ” the same 
reason was again given—“ Oh ! it’s the house ; it does not suit.” 
Rather a cheap excuse ! 
Not far from here is a collection of Orchids second to none any¬ 
where in the country for health. I remember saying so to Mr. 
Thomson of Drumlanrig. “Ah, yes,” he replied, “ Mr. F is, I 
believe, the best Orchid-grower in Britain.” Another who saw 
them was less generous and less just, for he said, “ It must be the 
house.” A few years ago these same Orchids were in anything 
but good condition, but the gardener accounted for his non-success 
by saying “ It’s the house.” 
“ R. P. B.” tells us of an Orchid-grower who is eminently suc¬ 
cessful in growing many kinds, but cannot grow Dendrobium 
nobile. The “house” fits those which thrive, it seems, but not 
those which fail. Suppose a change of gardeners, and suppose 
the new one grew D. nobile to perfection and failed with some of 
those which are now so luxuriant. “ R. P. B.” would say it was 
“ the house,” but the truth would be it would be the man. 
In my experience I have at one time been able to grow a certain 
plant well, and then fail with it altogether, and then succeed again 
in the same house. Some years ago, in the situation which I have 
just been compelled to resign, a &pan-roof house 30 feet long, 
14 feet broad, and 11 feet high was erected chiefly for growing 
Melons and a few ordinary stove plants. The pipes were arranged 
in the ordinary way, top and bottom heat being secured. Some 
one gave me a very small growth of Dendrobium nobile. This 
