ARAUCARIA IMBRICATA. 
9 
was then 6 feet 7 inches in girth near the ground; and, at 3 feet from the ground, 5 feet 6 inches in girth. 
The diameter of the spread of its branches was 26 feet 4 inches. For several years previous it had been 
covered with magnificent catkins. It grew 5 feet in four years, it having been 45 feet in height in 1863. Its 
subsequent growth has been at the rate of about 6 inches each year. There are other fine Araucarias at 
Dropmore, but none equal to the one in question. Its supremacy is probably due to the conditions in which 
it is situated, viz., growing on a mound of soil placed in the site of an old gravel pit, filled up and raised 
many feet. Mr Frost, the gardener at Dropmore, says that probably it has 15 feet or 20 feet depth of soil 
on which to grow. 
Two of the other trees at Dropmore are not far behind this specimen. They are about fifty years of 
age, having been planted out forty-six years ago. The one is 2 feet shorter than that of which we have spoken, 
and the other 8 or 9 feet shorter. They are growing in prepared soil 3 feet deep and 30 feet in diameter. 
The tree at Kew, already mentioned as having been one of those brought home by Menzies in the 
end of last century, and presented first to Sir Joseph Banks, and by him sent to Kew, was at first kept 
in a greenhouse until about 1806 or 1808, when it was planted out by the elder M‘Nab, afterwards super¬ 
intendent of the Edinburgh Botanic Garden. After it was planted out, it appears that, not being considered 
quite hardy, it was protected during winter with a temporary frame covered with mats ; and when Loudon 
wrote (1836), this practice was still continued, it being thought unsafe to leave it off. At that date it 
had only reached 12 feet in height. It had a stunted, unhealthy appearance—all the lower branches being 
gone—a sure sign that something was seriously wrong in the soil, position, or conditions of life of the tree. 
This injudicious treatment it has never recovered. Although twice the age of any other A. imbricata 
in Great Britain, it is now little more than 30 feet high, and it was all but killed in the severe winter of 1866-67. 
The finest tree in Scotland is that at Cairnsmore, in Kirkcudbright. The plant was sent from 
the Edinburgh Botanic Garden in 1835, but was not planted out until 1837, when it was about 2 feet 
in height. Its height in 1856 was 25 feet, the diameter of the spread of branches 16 feet, the girth of 
the bole, 3 feet from the ground, 2 feet 8 inches. It was then in a very healthy state, a perfect picture, 
clothed to the ground ; and the lower branches being pendulous, added very much to its elegant appear¬ 
ance. In 1862, it was 32 feet in height. Those which were the pride of the Edinburgh Royal Botanic 
Garden came very near this tree in beauty and size. 
It will be observed from the foregoing list of heights of trees, that Devonshire and Cornwall do not, 
in the present instance, maintain their wonted superiority on that point; and the rate of growth at Osborne 
contrasts unfavourably with that in the inland counties. At Castle Kennedy, however, which is only a mile 
or two from the sea, it thrives luxuriantly. It stands ordinary cold very well, and in its native country is 
exposed to as much as it meets with here, unless on exceptional occasions, which may, perhaps, not occur 
twice in a century. Notwithstanding its endurance of cold in Chili, it is plain that it may have too much of 
it here, and we must act accordingly. 
It is somewhat particular in regard to soil. The most general experience is that it must have a 
good and rather open soil, although the kind of soil is of less consequence. It does not like a retentive 
soil, but it will thrive even in moss if well drained, and if it be in that state that it can extract nourishment 
from the decayed vegetable matter. If in a moist climate, with a well-drained soil, it seems not to require 
so rich a soil. Mr Begbie, the gardener at Castle Martyr, near Cork, reports that “ it luxuriates in our 
poor soil on our porous red sandstone, and is even to be found growing vigorously in heaps of stones 
with only a surface covering of weeds.” But this is exceptional; our own experience, and that of most 
others whom we have heard speak on the subject, is, that whatever the soil be, it must have an ample 
supply of nourishment. Instances in proof of this must recur to every one who has grown the tree. 
We have seen young plants, which have stood for years without growing an inch higher, and which were 
the despair of their owner, suddenly start away and grow vigorously on being removed into better soil, or 
supplied with more nourishment. We remember, many years ago, and while the prejudice against giving 
[ 32 ] f 
manure 
