1 
1 ^ 
18 PINETUM BRITANNICUM. 
The following are the heights of some of the largest trees in Britain of which we have notes, with 
their supposed age, most of them having been measured in 1862 or 1863. 
County. 
Place. 
Height. 
Sup. 
Age. 
County. 
Place. 
Height. 
Sup. 
Age. 
County. 
Place. 
Height. 
Sup. 
Age. 
Devonshire . 
Eggesford. . 
IOO 
35 
Cornwall 
Bownnoe . 
54 
22 
Devonshire . 
Upcott 
36 
— 
Cornwall 
Carclew 
90 
35 
Cork .... 
Castle Martyr . 
50 
15 
Nottinghamshire Welbeck Abbey 
36 
2 I 
Devonshire . 
Woodovis 
72 
25 
Perthshire . 
Logiealmond . 
— 
— 
Tyrone . 
Cal. 
35 
20 
Suffolk 
Easton Park . 
70 
25 
)) 
Keillour . 
47 
31 
Lancashire . . 
Holkar 
35 
20 
Herefordshire . 
Hatfield House 
66 
30 
Essex 
Drinkstone Park 
45 
— 
F orfarshire 
Camperdown . 
35 
21 
Sussex 
Beauport . . 
. 66 
— 
Gloucestershire 
Highnam Court 
40 
l8 
Perthshire . 
Murthly Castle . 
35 
—- 
Kent .... 
Redleaf 
60 
31 
Herefordshire . 
Eastnor Castle . 
42 
30 
Mid-Lothian 
Riccarton . . . 
35 
20 
Perthshire . 
Taymouth 
62 
25 
Shropshire . 
Halston Hall 
40 
30 
Hampshire 
Longwood . . 
32 
25 
Derbyshire . 
Chatsworth . 
60 
40 
Berkshire 
Windsor Castle . 
40 
l8 
N orthumberland 
Alnwick Castle . 
30 
20 
Dumbarton . 
Rossdhu . 
56 
24 
Westmoreland . 
Patterdale Hall . 
40 
22 
Denbighshire . 
Coed Coch . . 
30 
13 
Devonshire . 
Bicton . . . 
55 
25 
Ambleside . . 
40 
l6 
Isle of Wight . 
Osborne 
30 
28 
Derbyshire . 
Elvaston . . 
54 
27 
Peebles . . 
Dalwick . 
38 
27 
Perthshire . 
Keir . . . . 
3 6 
25 
Culture .—British Columbia is very nearly on the same isothermal line as Great Britain, and 
Vancouver Island occupies a position in relation to the Continent of America very nearly identical with that 
which Great Britain does to the Continent of Europe. The chief difference lies in the more mountainous 
character of the western half of the American Continent There is consequently more moisture, but, on the 
whole, the climate is similar, and the plants which thrive in the one thrive in the other. Like others, the 
Douglas Spruce does so too. 
Mr Palmer’s tables of worst effects in the winter of 1860*61 give the following very satisfactory results, 
viz., in England, of 65 trees examined there were—killed 1, injured 6, much injured 1, uninjured 57 ; in 
Scotland, of 28 trees, 2 were injured and 26 uninjured ; in Ireland, of 3 trees examined all were uninjured. 
The deaths at the single place where any occurred (Wallingford Castle, Berks) were probably due to 
some exceptional peculiarity in the plants or in the soil. 
It is not only hardy, but thrives well in almost every part of the kingdom, except, perhaps, the north 
of Scotland. Mr James Brown, who has had extensive experience of the growth of trees in Scotland, says 
(“ Forester,” p. 273) that it thrives well in the midland and southern counties of Scotland; but in the 
northern and high-lying parts of the country, as in Strathspey, it does not succeed, from the want of heat to 
mature its shoots in the autumn, and from the great degree of cold which follows in winter. His experience 
was, that in all the low-lying parts of the country, even in the north of Scotland, it was hardy enough, and 
grew freely, nearly as rapidly as the Spruce Fir. Dr Lindley mentions, as an instance of the rapidity of its 
growth (“ Penny Cyclopaedia,” p. 32), that he had seen a branch three inches in diameter which was not 
eight years old. 
It is not every soil, however, that suits the Douglas Spruce. Mr Strickland tells us that it grows well 
at Boynton on the chalk, in a chalk gravel valley, but will nowhere grow on the oolite; and that this is the 
case both in the north of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. 
It fruits early, very generally producing cones when about 18 or 20 feet high. Colonel Howard 
mentions a specimen that was planted at Ashstead Park in 1835, being full of cones in 1843. 
Of course, the fruiting of these Douglas Spruces is hailed by most proprietors as an auspicious event, 
enabling them, as it does, without having recourse to the nurseryman, to supply themselves with young plants, 
and to people their woods with this most desirable tree. It is not so by all, however. Some consider that 
plants grown from British seed are inferior to those grown from seeds produced in its native country, and 
that it is bad economy to use seeds produced in this country, the higher price of seedlings raised from native 
seed being more than made up by the greater value of the future trees. Much discussion has of late taken 
place on this point. Mr M‘Nab, of the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, who has paid much attention 
to it, has published (“ Transactions of the Botanic Society, Edinburgh”) some facts which seem to warrant 
the conclusion that the British-raised seeds produced degenerate and inferior plants, and many of his 
inferences were drawn from his own observation and experience in the Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. He 
compared 
