112 



FORESTS, FOREST LANDS AND FOREST PRODFOTS. 



The apparent disproportiou between capital and value of output 

 in the various statements is due to the different extent to which 

 remanufacturing is carried at different places. Wilmington, too, 

 largely increased during 1893 the capital engaged therein milling, 

 but not sufficiently early in the year to increase the output in like 

 ratio. The output of no shingle-mills or remanufacturing establish- 

 ments except such as are connected with lumber-mills is included 

 in the above. Elizabeth City and Edenton, with twelve mills, had 

 a combined output of 38,000,000 feet, board measure, and 21,000,000 

 shingles. The shingles made in these places were largely from 

 juniper or white cedar; the lumber was chiefly made from the lob- 

 lolly pine. All except a small part of the output of Wilmington 

 was from long-leaf pine, that of Newbern and Washington was 

 largely loblolly pine, less than five per cent, being long-leaf. The 

 Aberdeen district in Moore county, and the western part of Cum- 

 berland county produced in 1893 over 31,000,000 feet of long-leaf 

 pine. 



r^UMBER PRODUCT FROM DIFFERENT SPECIP:S OF TREES. 



The output in eastern North Carolina, 1893, of lumber and 

 shingles was distributed according to kind of tree as follows: 



Lumber Product from Biferent Kinds of Trees, 1893. 



Kind of Timber. 



Lumber, thou- 

 sand feet, 

 board measure. 



Loblolly pine* 



Long-leaf pine 



Cypress 



Juniper (white cedar). 



Ash 



Yellow poplart 



288,090 

 148,600 

 6,275 

 6,300 

 5,000 

 2,400 



Shingles. 



10,300,000 

 111,680,000 

 44,200,000 



*The savanna and short-leaf pine were sawn along with the loblolly and not distinguished from 

 it, so there was no way of getting any accurate information about the quantity of these that was 

 sawn. The savanna pine formed a largepart of the material sawn at some mills in the extreme east, 

 but there was no appreciable amount of short-leaf pine sawn except along the western boundary 

 of the pine belt. Loblolly pine was reported as being sawn in thirty-three counties, and in twenty 

 of these no long-leaf pine was sawni. Long-leaf pine was sawn in twenty-one counties and entirely 

 sav/n to the exclusion of the loblolly pine in six counties. The counties which produced the most lob- 

 lolly pine were Beaufort, Bertie, Columbus, Craven, Dare, Gates, Halifax, Hertford, Jones, Lenoir, 

 Martin, Onslow, Perquimans and Washington. Those which produced the most long-leaf pine 

 were Cumberland. Moore, Richmond, Sampson and Robeson counties. 



flucluditig small quantities of persimmon, sweet-gum, oak and dogwood. 



