REVIEWS 471 



properties and uses. Much attention is given naturally to a comparison 

 of Douglas fir and southern pines. A statement is given summing up 

 the existing information on the comparative strengths of Douglas fir 

 and longleaf pine structural timbers. Douglas fir beams are stronger 

 in fiber stress at the elastic limit, though weaker in modulus of rupture 

 (average of both about 10 per cent) ; weaker in longitudinal shear where 

 used as very short beams (20 to 25 per cent) ; stiffer (5 per cent) ; weaker 

 in compression parallel to grain (10 to 20 per cent), but stronger in 

 compression perpendicular to grain (10 per cent) ; and averages about 

 20 per cent lighter in weight. 



The subject of grading rules in connection with structural timbers 

 is briefly treated, bringing out the relative influence of the various 

 defects upon strength. Efficient grading rules must be evolved for 

 British Columbia fir, if it is to compete with longleaf timbers. 



We are glad to see this bulletin issued to the Canadian wood user, 

 and trust it is but the forerunner of many others to help educate the 

 public to a more intensive and intelligent utilization of native woods. 



J. H. W. 



Report on Timber Import Trade of Australia. By H. R. Mac- 

 Millan. Supplement to Weekly Bulletin of the Department of Trade 

 and Commerce. Ottawa, Canada. 1917. * Pp. 76. 



The underlying cause for the visit of Mr. MacMillan to Australia 

 and for the preparation of this report is expressed in his first sentence: 

 "The serious decline of Canada's share of Australia's timber imports 

 would at any time demand attention. That this loss of trade in raw 

 products between two neighboring British dominions should occur at 

 a time when imperial sentiment is strengthening, when the move for 

 closer imperial trade relations is gaining favor, and should be most 

 marked in a trade in which Canada not only possesses all the natural 

 advantages, but in which she has greatly increased her productive 

 capacity during the period of trade, is a matter of serious concern." 

 During twenty-five years the Canadian export to Australia was rarely 

 over 10 per cent of the Pacific Coast export; in 1913 it was only 3 per 

 cent of the total, and hardly 5 per cent of the Pacific Coast export. 



Although in the comparative tables Japan is not mentioned, in the 

 text the statement is n-iade that Japan, which exports a poor pine for 

 box boards, has outdistanced Canada in the Australian timber trade, and 



