Page:EB1911 - Volume 13.djvu/767

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
748
HORTICULTURE
[GARDEN STRUCTURES


with rubble stones, flints, brickbats or similar material, thoroughly drained at bottom. For mere purposes of shelter a height of 6 or 7 ft. will generally be sufficient for the walls of a garden, but for the training of fruit trees it is found that an average height of 12 ft. is more suitable. In gardens of large size the northern or principal wall may be 14 ft., and the side walls 12 ft. in height; while smaller areas of an acre or so should have the principal walls 12 and the side walls 10 ft. in height. As brick is more easily built hollow than stone, it is to be preferred for garden walls. A 14-in. hollow wall will take in its construction 12,800 bricks, while a solid 9-in. one, with piers, will take 11,000; but the hollow wall, while thus only a little more costly, will be greatly superior, being drier and warmer, as well as more substantial. Bricks cannot be too well burnt for garden walls; the harder they are the less moisture will they absorb. Many excellent walls are built of stone. The best is dark-coloured whinstone, because it absorbs very little moisture, or in Scotland Caithness pavement 4 in. thick. The stones can be cut (in the quarries) to any required length, and built in regular courses. Stone walls should always be built with thin courses for convenience of training over their surface. Concrete walls, properly coped and provided with a trellis, may in some places be cheapest, and they are very durable. Common rubble walls are the worst of all.

The coping of garden walls is important, both for the preservation of the walls and for throwing the rain-water off their surfaces. It should not project less than from 2 to 21/2 in., but in wet districts may be extended to 6 in. Stone copings are best, but they are costly, and Portland cement is sometimes substituted. Temporary copings of wood, which may be fixed by means of permanent iron brackets just below the stone coping, are extremely useful in spring for the protection of the blossoms of fruit trees. They should be 9 in. or 1 ft. wide, and should be put on during spring before the blossom buds begin to expand; they should have attached to them scrim cloth (a sort of thin canvas), which admits light pretty freely, yet is sufficient to ward off ordinary frosts; this canvas is to be let down towards evening and drawn up again in the morning. These copings should be removed when they are of no further utility as protectors, so that the foliage may have the full benefit of rain and dew. Any contrivance that serves to interrupt radiation, though it may not keep the temperature much above freezing, will be found sufficient. Standard fruit trees must be left to take their chance; and, indeed from the lateness of their flowering, they are generally more injured by blight, and by drenching rains, which wash away the pollen of the flowers, than by the direct effects of cold.

Espalier Rails.—Subsidiary to walls as a means of training fruit trees, espalier rails were formerly much employed, and are still used in many gardens. In their simplest form, they are merely a row of slender stakes of larch or other wood driven into the ground, and connected by a slight rod or fillet at top. The use of iron rails has now been almost wholly discontinued on account of metallic substances acting as powerful conductors of both heat and cold in equal extremes. Standards from which galvanized wire is tightly strained from one end to the other are preferable and very convenient. Trees trained to them are easily got at for all cultural operations, space is saved, and the fruit, while freely exposed to sun and air, is tolerably secure against wind. They form, moreover, neat enclosures for the vegetable quarters, and, provided excess of growth from the centre is successfully grappled with, they are productive in soils and situations which are suitable.

Plant Houses.—These include all those structures which are more intimately associated with the growth of ornamental plants and flowers, and comprise conservatory, plant stove, greenhouse and the subsidiary pits and frames. They should be so erected as to present the smallest extent of opaque surface consistent with stability. With this object in view, the early improvers of hot-house architecture substituted metal for wood in the construction of the roofs, and for the most part dispensed with back walls; but the conducting power of the metal caused a great irregularity of temperature, which it was found difficult to control; and, notwithstanding the elegance of metallic houses, this circumstance, together with their greater cost, has induced most recent authorities to give the preference to wood. The combination of the two, however, shows clearly that, without much variation of heat or loss of light, any extent of space may be covered, and houses of any altitude constructed.

The earliest notice we have of such structures is given in the Latin writers of the 1st century (Mart. Epigr. viii. 14 and 68); the Ἀδὠνιδος κῆποι, to which allusion is made by various Greek authors, have no claim to be mentioned in this connexion. Columella (xi. 3, 51, 52) and Pliny (H.N. xix. 23) both refer to their use in Italy for the cultivation of the rarer and more delicate sorts of plants and trees. Seneca has given us a description of the application of hot water for securing the necessary temperature. The botanist Jungermann had plant houses at Altdorf in Switzerland; those of Loader, a London merchant, and the conservatory in the Apothecaries’ Botanic Garden at Chelsea, were among the first structures of the kind erected in British gardens. These were, however, ill adapted for the growth of plants, as they consisted of little else than a huge chamber of masonry, having large windows in front, with the roof invariably opaque. The next step was taken when it became fashionable to have conservatories attached to mansions, instead of having them in the pleasure grounds. This arrangement brought them within the province of architects, and for nearly a century utility and fitness for the cultivation of plants were sacrificed, as still is often the case, to the unity of architectural expression between the conservatory and the mansion.

Fig. 2.—Lean-to Plant House.

Plant houses must be as far as possible impervious to wet and cold air from the exterior, provision at the same time being made for ventilation, while the escape of warm air from the interior must also be under control. The most important part of the enclosing material is necessarily glass. But as the rays of light, even in passing through transparent glass, lose much of their energy, which is further weakened in proportion to the distance it has to travel, the nearer the plant can be placed to the glass the more perfectly will its functions be performed; hence the importance of constructing the roofs at such an angle as will admit the most light, especially sunlight, at the time it is most required. Plants in glass houses require for their fullest development more solar light probably than even our best hot-houses transmit—certainly much more than is transmitted through the roofs of houses as generally constructed.

Plant houses constructed of the best Baltic pine timber are very durable, but the whole of the parts should be kept as light as possible. In many houses, especially those where ornament is of no consequence, the rafters are now omitted, or only used at wide intervals, somewhat stouter sash-bars being adopted, and stout panes of glass (usually called 21-oz.) 12 to 18 in. wide, made use of. Such houses are very light; being also very close, they require careful ventilation. The glass roof is commonly designed so as to form a uniform plane or slope from back to front in lean-to houses (fig. 2), and from centre to sides in span-roofed houses. To secure the greatest possible influx of light, some horticulturists recommend curvilinear roofs; but the superiority of these is largely due to the absence of rafters, which may also be dispensed with in plain roofs. They are very expensive to build and maintain. Span and ridge-and-furrow roofs, the forms now mostly preferred, are exceedingly well adapted for the admission of light, especially when they are glazed to within a few inches