2168

ARBORETUM AND FRUTICETUM.

PART III,

in Britain about the end of the 17th century ; and about the middle of thatfollowing, some planted trees, more especially in Scotland , having been cutdown, and employed as timber, were found to be of inferior quality to importedtimber, or to that grown in natural forests. Dr. Walker, writing near theend of the last century, observes that the Scotch pine had been planted everywhere in abundance, but had not yet had time for its timber to arrive at per-fection. The timber of this tree, he adds, is depreciated, because it is white,soft, and perishable; though he argues that this is merely from want of agein the tree. In the course of years, he says, this white wood will becomered ; and the planted fir will become more and more valuable in quality, amibe held in greater estimation. The prejudice against the wood of the Scotchpine seems to have been at its greatest height between 1790 and 1810; forMarshal, writing in 1796, says, the Scotch pine “ should be invariably ex-cluded from every soil and situation in which any other timber tree can bemade to flourish. The north aspect of bleak and barren heights is the onlysituation in which it ought to be tolerated; and even there the larch is seento outbrave it. In better soils, and milder situations, the wood of the Scotchfir is worth little; and its growth is so licentious, as to overrun every thingwhich grows in its immediate neighbourhood; and this renders it wholly un-fit to be associated with other timber trees; we therefore now discard itentirely from all useful plantations.” ( Plant. and Rur. Orn., i. p. 146.) Soonafterwards (in 1798), Mr. Thomas Davis, a planter and manager of timber ofgreat experience, and high and deserved repute, who had then had the careof the Marquess of Bath’s plantations, near Warminster, for 35 years, and whohad planted upwards of 25,000 trees a year on poor heathy land, at the foot ofthe Wiltshire Downs, published a paper in the Transactions of the Society ofArts, vol. xvi., in which he refutes the generally received opinion, that the Eng-lish -grown Scotch pine was of no use as timber, by facts that had come withinhis own knowledge. “ I can assert from experience,” he says, “ that, for strengthand durability, English -grown fir is equal to any foreign deal whatever. I allowthat the Scotch fir (although it is, undoubtedly, the real yellow deal) is sel-dom of so fine a grain as the foreign yellow deal; but this is certainly occa-sioned by the rapidity of its growth, and its having too much room to throwout large side branches. Lord Bath’s Scotch firs, which are known to havebeen planted in 1696, are from 2ft. to 3ft. in diameter; whereas the bestChristiania deal, although evidently 100 years old, is seldom above 1 ft. inameter; and its knots, which denote the size of its side branches, are smalland inconsiderable, therefore evidently appearing to have grown slow and closetogether. We have a cart-house on Lord Bath’s estate, which was builtabove 80 years ago, out of small firs, which is now perfectly sound and up-right ; and, for the last 20 years, all the carpenters of the country have usedsmall firs for rafters, &c., with success ; and no timber is more ready of sale-(p. 125.) In Lambert’s Pinus , ed. 2., vol. ii. p. 177., is published a letter tonearly the same effect, from the same writer ; and the same facts have beenlately (1837) confirmed to us by Mr. Davies’s son and successor, the present

Thomas Davies, Esq., of Portway House, near Warminster. Pontey,

hi'

Forest Pruner, published in 1805, also defends the Scotch pine against d*“ almost universally prevalent ” prejudices against it. “ At first sight, a®says, “ it seems natural to suppose such prejudices must be well foundeoithough, in fact, they rest upon no better foundation than the prejudice tunprevailed, less than a century ago, against foreign fir timber; namely, a pre-judice, the effect of inexperience. At that time, no workman could be f° uncredulous enough to suppose that a roof made of it would answer the purp 0 ®as well as one made of oak; and yet now the tide of opinion is comply®)turned. An article which, apparently, has but little of either strength ^durability is found, by experience, to possess a very extraordinary degreeboth.” ( Forest Pruner, p. 52.) Mr. Pontey traces the prejudice to theof young trees as timber; the absurdity of which, he says, where strength adurability are required, every one will admit.