181 



Sussex, whose work was published in 1834. I will now read to you what he 

 says upon the subject : — 



"I may refer to the supposed difference in the durability of the timber 

 produced by the two species of oak iudigenous in this country, viz., Q. sessili- 

 flora and Q. pe-dunculata. * * * Upon a transverse section of the trunk 

 of the Q. ped. a vast multitude of medullary rays are found, which, by forming 

 continuous lines from the centre to the circumference, divide the whole trunk 

 into so many thin plates ; but upon viewing a section of the Q. sess. no such 

 appearance is found. It has been stated by many persons, and is still a very 

 prevalent notion, that the wood of the Q. sess. is of no use, being very 

 weak, and unfit for those purposes for which oak is usually used ; and even 

 cases of shipwreck attributed to the vessels having been built of Q. sess. have 

 been cited by those who have spread this absurd notion in support of their 

 theory. Even in a lecture on botany, delivered by Dr. Murta in the School 

 of Medicine at Dublin, April 14th, 1834, I find the following statement, and 

 quote it to show how great the prejudice is : — ' Saving casually alluded to 

 forest trees, I may observe in further illustration of this point, that there 

 are in this island two species of oak growing indigenously ; one of them 

 furnishing wood of the most durable kind, while that of the other is compara- 

 tively worthless.' * * * On the faith of such statements as these, many 

 noblemen's grounds have been freed of the Q. sess., very great sacrifices having 

 been made by cutting down young and vigorous trees, on the supposition 

 that it would be folly to allow them to occupy valuable space. That the 

 wood of the Q. sess. is of as much, if not more, value than that of the Q. ped. 

 will be at once acknowledged, when it is learned that the piles used in the 

 Thames, the wood found in old buildings, the wood in Westminster Abbey, 

 &c., is all of this now contemned species ; in fact all the wood commonly, 

 though erroneously, called by carpenters chestnut, is of the Q. sess., the real 

 chestnut wood being of a very different sort. 



"To what cause the mistake may be ascribed it is difficult to say. 

 It may possibly have obtained the name of chestnut wood from the want of 

 the large quantity of continuous medullary rays so prevalent in the Q. ped., 

 which aie the cause of the latter being so much used for park palings, these 

 rays giving it the property of being easily split by wedges, and obtaining for 

 it the name of 'rent oak.' 



"Besides, the Q. sess. is decidedly the most handsome tree, growing 

 much more erect, and being of richer colour, at the same time growing more 

 freely and with greater rapidity." 



Finally, Dr. Lindley, in his Synopsis of the British Flora, says Q. sess. is 

 as superior in the quality of its timber to Q. pedunc. , as it is in beauty and 

 vigour of growth. 



The balance of published evidence seems to preponderate so greatly in 

 favour of the Q. sess. that further quotations are, I think, unnecessary, I 

 will only add the results of my own observation. 



