February 28, 1891. 
THE GABDENING WOBLD 
411 
MR. DOUGLAS ON ORCHIDS.* 
My subject is a very comprehensive one, and being so, 
cannot be treated very much in detail. My first 
experience of Orchid culture Began in the year 1855, 
and it is safe to say that the changes during that period 
have been so great as to revolutionise the whole system 
of Orchid culture. At that time complete collections 
of Orchids as they are known now were unheard of. 
Of course, Orchids had frequently been imported many 
years previous to this, and a few wealthy amateurs had 
bestowed considerable pains and incurred much ex¬ 
pense in experiments upon their culture. 
Hi stout. 
It is stated in the Botanical Magazine, vol. lxvii, for 
the year 1841, that the Duke of Bedford had two 
houses for Orchids at Woburn Abbey, in which the 
plants were cultivated in moss upon branches of trees 
placed against the sides of the buildings. Another 
notable cultivator of Orchids at that time was Mr. 
Harris, of Kingsbury, and whose gardener was the 
celebrated Donald Beaton. I mention the late Mr. 
Beaton in connection with Orchid culture because he 
was the first who suggested growing Orchids in a 
comparatively cool atmosphere. Mr. Beaton had to 
deal with an importation of Orchids received in 
September, 1840, among them being Lielia autumnalis, 
L. albida, L. furfuracea, Cattleya citrina, and others 
of a similar character. He put some of them into a 
heated hothouse, and a further portion into a fruit- 
room, where the temperature was 35° to 45° during 
the winter, and he said these did better than those 
placed in a heated house, and Cattleya citrina liked 
the treatment best. 
Mr. Beaton, in a letter written at that time to the 
late Sir William Jackson Hooker, says, “I believe this 
will be the first notice of plants of this tribe having 
been subjected to a cold temperature in this country, 
and I have ample proof that these and many others 
will not do so well if they are subjected to a heat above 
50° or 55° in winter. Nothing can be more difficult 
than to bring some of the plants in my list to any state 
of healthy growth in our excessively heated Orchid¬ 
aceous houses, but treated as greenhouse plants, and 
with a little forcing at the end of six weeks, at the end 
of spring, or whenever they show a disposition to new 
growth, they seem as easy to manage as Stanhopeas, 
or any other free-growing sorts.” 
At the same time as Beaton was experimenting at 
Kingsbury, and the Duke of Bedford at Woburn Abbey, 
another noted horticulturist, Mr. John Dillwyn 
Llewelyn, of Penllergare, South Wales, conceived the 
idea of furnishing a house on the natural system, the 
Orchids growing on rocks, and suspended from the 
roof over an artificial waterfall. Mr. Llewelyn was 
most successful in his undertaking. He says, “The 
moist stones were speedily covered with a thick carpet of 
seedling Ferns and the creeping stems of tropical 
Lycopods, among the fronds of which many species of 
Orchideae delighted to root themselves. Huntleya 
violacea was the first Orchid planted, and it throve 
well. The East Indian genera, such as Yanda, Sacco- 
labium, ASrides, and other caulescent sorts, were the 
most vigorous, and only required the use of the 
pruning knife to keep them from overgrowing smaller 
and more delicate species.” 
I would particularly draw attention to the fact that 
Donald Beaton recommended a cool system of culture 
for Orchids from Mexico as long ago as 1841 ; while 
horticulturists were so slow to follow his advice that 
for twenty years the beautiful Odontoglossums, Masde- 
vallias, &c., from the mountains of Colombia and the 
Peruvian Andes were stewed to death in moist over¬ 
heated plant stoves. 
It was not until the year I860 that the spell was 
broken. A house specially adapted for cool Orchids 
was built by Messrs. Jackson, of the Kingston Nursery, 
and soon after by Messrs. J. Veitch & Sons, of Chelsea. 
The minimum temperatures were kept at or near that 
which the plants experienced in their native mountain 
homes. The results were most encouraging. Orchids 
which pined and struggled for existence in an East 
Indian temperature regained their native vigour in an 
atmosphere and temperature adapted to them. The 
few amateurs who cultivated Orchids at that time also 
built cool houses, amongst them Mr. John Day, of 
Tottenham ; Mr. Sigismund Rucker, of Wandsworth ; 
and Mr. James Bateman, of Biddulph Grange ; and 
the success attained in a few years was such that 
the whole system of Orchid culture was gradually 
revolutionised, and an impetus given to it that has 
“ A paperread by Mr. J. Douglas at the meeting of the Reading 
Gardeners’ Mutual Improvement Association on Feb, 16th, 
caused Orchids to be the most popular of plants, and 
their cultivation to be increased at least a hundredfold. 
People now wonder that plants, just because they were 
Orchids, should have been grown in the same house and 
the same temperature, when they naturally grew, on the 
one hand in the pestilential swamps of Madagascar, 
the sultry coasts of Africa, and the East Indies, and on 
the other in the mild and pure air of the mountainous 
districts of America. The above historical review will 
serve as an introduction to the more practical part of 
my subject. 
Cultural Treatment. 
Orchids are now placed in three great divisions as 
regards temperatures—namely, the cool house for 
Odontoglossums, Masdevallias, some of the Oncidiums, 
Epidendrums, Disas, Lycastes, the queer-looking 
Nanodes Medusie, Mesospinidiums, Ada aurantiaca, 
Maxillarias, &c.; the Cattleya house for the important 
genera of the Cattleya and Lielia, many of the Cypri- 
pediums, Catasetums, Ccelogynes, Cymbidiums, Den- 
drobiums, Epidendrums, Lycastes, Anguloas, Miltonias, 
Mormodes, Oneidium, Pleiones, Aerides, Vandas, 
Zygopetalums, Trichopilias, &c.; and lastly, the East 
India house for a few of the Aerides, such as 
A. suavissimum, Angnecums, except A. falcatum, 
some of the Cypripediums, Phalrenopsis, Saccola- 
biums, &£. 
The minimum temperatures for the cool house would 
be 45°, for the Cattleya house 55°, and for the East 
India house 65°. The form of the houses is not of so 
much importance as some would suppose, nor indeed 
does success or failure depend upon the quality of the 
workmanship, or the arrangements for ventilation, 
shading, &c. For instance, I have known cases of 
infinite care and the most liberal expense incurred in 
order to grow the Moth Orchids (Phalienopsis), and 
with anything but the best results ; and on the other 
hand I have seen the most splendid examples of this 
genus grown in a lean-to house of a very ordinary 
description. In another garden they are grown almost 
as well in a span-roofed house, while good gardeners 
with every appliance have failed to grow them. Some 
of the most difficult Orchids to grow are the Bate- 
maunias, Pescatoreas, Bollias, Huntleyas, and Orchids 
of this class. Few gardeners have succeeded in growing 
them successfully. They require quite exceptional 
treatment, but in reference to this I may say that I 
saw a collection of these plants the other day in the 
best of health, growing in a lean-to plant house of the 
most ordinary description, which had been built for 
another purpose, and not for Orchidaceous plants 
at all. 
Those who have been the most successful cultivators 
of Orchids are they who have an intense love for their 
work. The duties of attending to the minor details of 
the work are very exacting, and cannot be faithfully 
performed by one who has no real love for the work for 
its own sake, as it is only by careful attention to the 
most minute details that any degree of success can be 
assured. Some species of Orchids are much more 
easily grown than others in the same genus under 
artificial conditions, although the most difficult to 
manage in our Orchid houses seem to grow freely 
enough in their native haunts. Much may be learned 
by visiting collections at different seasons of the year. 
The gardener who always stays at home and sees but 
little work other than his own is apt to think too 
much of any little successes he may have. 
In the early years of my Orchid experience I picked 
up much useful information in this way, but one or 
two instances will suffice. I bought at an Orchid sale 
six plants of Cattleya superba, at a time when I knew 
nothing of their cultural requirements. They were 
brought home and carefully planted in the usual 
compound of Orchid peat, sphagnum, &c., as if they 
were Cattleya Mossiae, but I found they did not do 
well, made poor growths, and in a little time four 
plants were dead. At that time Mr. Rucker’s Orchids 
at West Hill, Wandsworth, were under the care of an 
excellent cultivator, Mr. Pilcher. I called there and 
found Cattleya superba beautifully in flower, suspended 
near the roof-glass of a warm house, and the plants 
attached to a short length of the stem of a Tree Fern. 
I was told by Mr. Pilcher that it did best in that 
way. As soon as I got home I found two pieces of 
Tree Fern and treated my two remaining plants in 
the same way, and they seemed to spring into new 
life, producing strong growths and flowering freely for 
years. 
I had at one time a battle to grow the beautiful 
Cymbidium eburneum ; it was planted also as if it was 
a Cattleya, and grown in a shallow mass of broken 
crocks and fibrous peat. I did not know it was a 
ditch plant at home until I saw it growing freely in 
another garden in loam. I planted it in a good depth 
of loam and leaf-soil, and success came with rational 
treatment. Many Orchids do better in loam than they 
do in peat. The beautiful and well-known Ccelogyne 
cristata is usually grown in a compound of fibrous peat 
and sphagnum, but the plants make a much stronger 
and better growth when fibrous loam is mixed with 
the peat ; but to specify the kind of potting material 
required for each genus of Orchids would be too tedious. 
The large groups of Aerides, Saccolabium, Yanda, 
Phalsenopsis and Angnecum require broken pottery 
and live sphagnum, and when the sphagnum dies on 
the surface, it must be renewed. Most of the Cattleyas, 
Ladias, Dendrobium9, Cypripediums, Masdevallias, 
Epidendrums, Odontoglossums, Oncidiums, &c., de¬ 
light in peat and sphagnum. The Calanthes, Cym- 
bidiums, Lycaste, Phaius, Sobralia and Zygopetalum 
require loam and peat in varying proportions. 
(To be continued .) 
-- 
GARDENERS’ ASSOCIATIONS 
AND THE BEST BOOKS TO READ. 
Your remarks on Gardeners’ Associations in your issue 
of February 4th, p. 373, are to the point; and let us 
hope will be the means of drawing attention to the 
amount of good being done to gardeners and gardening 
throughout the districts where gardeners’ associations 
exist. There is yet one step I should like to see taken 
by them, and that is, they should all amalgamate and 
form a federation where yearly examinations could be 
held in connection therewith. This is the kind of 
union that is wanted amongst gardeners—a union that 
would stimulate every member to excel in all useful 
information relating to gardening. 
A federation of this kind would be the means of 
bringing to the front men who are not merely content 
with doing their day’s work, but who in addition would 
like to possess whatever knowledge there is to be 
obtained, bearing on the different branches they are 
most interested in. Nor would this be all, for if the 
examinations were carried out in a systematic manner, 
it would be the means of showing employers where the 
best talent is to be obtained. It is in this way that the 
federation would do most good, and would, weed out all 
those who take no interest in gardening beyond doing 
a day’s work for a day’s pay. Such men are never likely 
to make their mark in gardening. Then if employers 
chose to pick men who were afraid to take part in the 
examinations, they would be to blame if they did not 
succeed in getting the best men under the circumstances. 
I have no doubt that the true value of such a federation, 
and of those who had passed its examination, would be 
quickly recognised and its certificates much sought 
after, both by employer and employed. 
In connection with gardeners’ associations the 
question of what are the best books to read has 
cropped up. I trust you will be able to render some 
help here. The question is a most important one, 
more especially to those young gardeners who are 
anxious to procure the best books treating on the 
different branches of gardening. There are now so 
many books in the market that it is often difficult to 
find out which are the best. With this I venture to 
append a selection of what I consider are standard 
works on gardening, and which are likely to assist 
young gardeners:—1, Thompson’s Gardeners' Assistant ; 
2, Nicholson’s Dictionary of Gardening, a useful work, 
but where this cannot be had on account of the price, 
I would strongly recommend The Treasury of Botany, 
a cheap book, containing much useful and interesting 
information ; 3, Burbidge’s Propagation and Improve¬ 
ment of Cultivated Plants ; 4, Pines and Vine Culture, 
by A. F. Barron ; 5, Fruit Culture Under Glass, by 
D. Thompson ; 6, Williams’ Orchid Growers’ Manual 
(latest edition), or, where money is no object, Yeitch’s 
Manual of Orchidaceous Plants, which is a more com¬ 
prehensive work ; 7, Williams’ Choice Stove and Green¬ 
house Plants, Flowering and Foliage (2 vols.) ; 8, 
Williams’ Ferns and Lycopods-, 9, Robinson’s English 
Flower Garden ; 10, Henfrey’s Elementary Botany ; 
11, Loudon’s Encyclopaedia of Plants ; and 12, Hardy 
Florists’ Flowers, by J. Douglas. There are some which 
it is difficult to decide to leave out of a collection of the 
twelve best books on gardening; but the above would 
form a good nucleus, to which others could be added 
in due course. Other readers may be able to suggest 
better books than some of the above, and the present 
time would constitute a good opportunity for compiling 
a list of the best books on gardening.— Alex. Wright. 
