NOTES 663 



In the Journal for November, 1919. is a paragraph (which I over- 

 looked at first) over the initials "E. N. M.," stating that there are 

 CaHfornia trees which have contained more sawable timber than the 

 full volume of the giant Kauri tree "Kairaru" 31,416 cubic feet, or 

 376,992 board feet. The comparative size of the giant Kauri trees of 

 New Zealand and of the largest specimens of Sequoia gigantea, is 

 more fully discussed in my recently issued report "New Zealand For- 

 estry," Part 1, Department of Forestry, New Zealand, 1919. From 

 this it will be seen that it is not claimed that the largest of the giant 

 Kauri trees had dimensions equal to those of the largest of the Cali- 

 fornia "big-tree," but that, owing to the cylindrical stem of the giant 

 Kauri trees, they probably contained a greater volume of sawable 

 timber. The writer of your paragraph states that a Sequoia tree "cut 

 in 1854 called the 'Mother of the Forest' " had a diameter of 30 feet 

 and a height of 321 feet and contained 537,000 hoard feet. He does 

 not state how this high volume figure was obtained or what was the 

 taper of the tree. The other instances quoted by E. N. M. are meas- 

 urements of height and diameter only. 



I take it that E. N. M.'s tree, "Mother of the Forest," is not the 

 same as that mentioned in Bulletin No. 39T, "Calaveras Big Tree Na- 

 tional Forest," for that had a gross volume of only 140,619 board feet 

 and it was the largest tree in the Calaveras Grove in 1912. In stating 

 the maximum authentic dimensions for the California "big-tree," I 

 have quoted the best American authorities, Sargent, Sudworth, and 

 others, and the two official bulletins. No. 95 "Commercial Woods of 

 the U. S. A." and No. 397 "Calaveras Big Tree National Forest." 



The figure quoted by E. N. M. is so much beyond that given by 

 the recognized authorities, that one naturally questions its authenticity. 

 It was not every one who could measure trees accurately in 1854. 

 Much later than that date there were trees of Eucalyptus regions over 

 500 feet in height! Writing in 1885 von Mueller, the well-known 

 Australian botanist, says categorically. "Mr. G. W. Robinson, sur- 

 veyor, measured a tree at the foot of Mount Baw Baw which was 471 

 feet high ! 



Needless to say these ancient stories of gigantic trees are no longer 

 credited. D. E. Hutchins. 



Wellington, New Zealand. 



In introducing Dr. B. E. Fernow for an LL.D. degree, President 

 Falconer of the University of Toronto, said: "Those whp have known 



