Page:TheTreesOfGreatBritainAndIreland vol02B.djvu/83

Rh

Though introduced by Peter Collinson about 1736, and at one time planted in almost every garden as an ornamental tree, the hemlock is rarely seen in Europe in a condition to remind the American of it as he knows it at home. Of late years it has been superseded by more modern and faster growing introductions.

I cannot exactly say what are the conditions which suit it best in this country, because I have not seen it planted in the shady, damp, and rocky gorges which it likes at home; but a deep light soil, free from lime and well drained, and a northern aspect, seem to suit it best in gardens. Its graceful habit and perfect hardiness should recommend it to all lovers of trees. It has a general tendency to fork near the ground, and this can only be checked by crowding it when young, or perhaps to some extent by careful pruning, as Loudon says that it bears the knife well, and is used for hedges in American nurseries; though I should consider either common spruce or arbor vitææ much better suited for the purpose here.

It ripens seed freely, but the plants I have raised were so small that frost and March winds destroyed them before I learned the necessity of protecting them; and in future I would imitate nature, and sow them on a mossy piece of half-rotten wood, or in a mixture of sand and leaf mould in a shaded frame.

By far the most remarkable specimens of this tree which exist in England, or, as I believe, in Europe, are at Foxley, Herefordshire, the seat of the Rev. G.H. Davenport, which are believed to have been planted by Sir Uvedale Price, who was once the owner of this place. He was born in 1747, and died in 1828. In Nash wood, about half a mile from the house, on a rich soil of old red sandstone formation, in a dell facing south-west, a number of these trees are growing, which, though not quite so large as the tree at Studley, average about 55 feet high by 8 to 10 in girth, and although their trunks are not so straight and clean as in an American forest, are nearly all sound and healthy. I measured twenty of these trees in July 1906 and found the largest, the only one which was forked near the ground, to be 10 feet in girth. Another was 9 ft. 10 in., and had a trunk which would contain from 120 to 130 cubic feet. The others ranged from 7 to 9½ feet at 5 feet from the ground, averaging over 8 feet, and were mostly clear of branches, or nearly so, for 15 to 30 feet from the ground. The dense shade of these trees keeps the soil quite free from vegetation below them, but I saw no seedlings in the grove. Though Mr. Davenport was good enough to have a considerable clearing made in order to get a better view of the trees, and Mr. Foster went to Foxley on purpose to photograph them, the difficulty of the subject was so great that the prints taken (Plate 70) do not show them as well as I could wish.

The largest tree which I have seen in England is at Studley Royal, not far below

Rh