CHAP. CXllI. CONIFERS. Pi'nUS. 2155 



a. Timber Trees. 



I P. s. 1 vulgaris, the common wild Pitie (^fig. 2046., to our usual 

 scale), is thus described by Don of Forfar. Branches forming 

 a pyramidal head; leaves marginated, of a dark green colour, 

 and but little glaucous underneath ; cones 

 considerably elongated, and tapering to a 

 point, and the bark of the trunk very rugged. 

 " This variety seems to be but short-lived, 

 becoming soon stunted in its appearance, and 

 it is altogether a very inferior tree to either 

 variety 2, or variety 3." (^Cal. Mem., i. p. 123.) 

 The common wild pine of the French is, by 

 Loiseleur Deslongchamps and some other 

 authors, called simply P. sylvestris, while 

 others again name it P. s. genevensis : but, 

 whether the P. sylvestris of Loiseleur Des- 

 longchamps (in the Nouveau Du Hamel) and 

 of Bosc, and the P. s. genevensis of Delamarre 

 (Traite Prat., Sec, p. 23.) and of several 

 other French authors, apply to one and the 

 same variety ; and whether this variety be 2046 



dentical with the P. s. genevensis of the Horticultural Society's 

 Garden, received from Noisette of Paris, and of which a plate is 

 given in our last Volume ; we are unable to decide. If they are the 

 same, which we think very likely to be the case, then the P. sylves- 

 tris of the French is of little value as a timber tree, and very 

 inferior to even the P. s. vulgaris, or commonest variety of the Scotch 

 pine found in Britain. 



1 P. «. 2 horizontdlis ; P. horizontalis Don of Forfar ; P. sylvestris var. 

 montana Sang, Plant. Cal., p. 65. ; the Speyside Pine, Hart. 

 Soc. ; the Highland Pine, Grigor in Gard. Mag., viii. p. 10. ; 

 the horizontal-branched wild Pine, Laws. ; the red-wooded Scotch 

 Pine, Sang ; ? P. riibra Mill. Diet, and N. Du Ham. — This va- 

 riety is described by Don of Forfar as being "strongly marked 

 and permanent." It " is distinguished from the former by the 

 disposition of its branches, which are remarkable for their hori- 

 zontal direction, and for a tendency to bend downwards close by 

 the trunk. The leaves are broader than those of the first variety, 

 and serrulated, and not marginated. They are distinguishable at a 

 distance by their much lighter and beautiful glaucous colour. The 

 bark of the trunk is not so rugged as in the preceding variety. Its 

 cones are thicker, not so much pointed, and smoother. The tree 

 seems to be a more hardy plant, being easily reconciled to very 

 various soils and situations. It grows very freely, and quickly 

 arrives at a considerable size." Mr. Don also conjectures " that 

 the fir woods which formerly abounded in Scotland, the trees 

 of which arrived at a large size, may have been of this variety or 

 species." " I have certainly observed," he adds, "that the greater 

 part of the fir woods of the present day, which are so much com- 

 plained of, are of the common variety \P. s. 1 vulgaris] ; at least, 

 not more than one tree out of 10 or 12 is of the second and more 

 desirable kind [P. s. 2 horizontalis]. I think," continues Mr. Don, 

 " that this is the most natural way of accounting for the supposed 

 decline of the Scotch fir in this country, for two reasons : 1st, be- 

 cause var. 2 [P. s. 2 horizontalis] retains all the good qualities 

 formerly attributed to the Scotch fir; and, 2dly, because, as var. 1 

 [P. s. 1 vulgaris] produces its cones much more freely than the 

 other, the seed-gatherers, who are paid by the quantity, and not by 

 the quality, would seize upon the former, and neglect the latter." 



