14 
strip of bark which sends forth a few branches , which even now 
occasionally produce acorns.” And thus we have a trustworthy- 
record of 78 years, as I have said, viz., from 1796 to 1874. The 
sketch, too, which accompanied the letter, and which is engraved 
in Loudon, and a larger figure at page 1775 of the same volume, 
both hear out the conclusion that a lapse of time, which would 
convert a little baby into a very old man, has left little or no mark 
on his iron frame, and as to his production of acorns, there were 
plenty when I visited him in 1866, thirty years after the date of Mr. 
Taylor’s letter, and one of them taken at that time is now a 
promising young eight-year-old in my garden, having the magnifi- 
cent circumference of two inches, at a distance of four inches above 
the soil, and this, in spite of rather rough usage and several trans- 
plantings since his acornage. Grigor, in his “ Eastern Arboretum,” 
published in 1841, gives an excellent drawing, by Ninham, which 
again bears out the idea that improvement has taken place since 
the date of its publication, and my own recollection of the tree, 
which extends from 1848, when I made a rough sketch, which I 
still possess, strongly confirms this. 
As to the authority for its having been called the “ Old Oak ” 
in the time of the Conqueror, I, like my betters, can find nothing, 
although I have had the able assistance of Mr. Manning. To him, 
however, I owe some encouragement for continuing the search, as 
he thinks it may possibly be mentioned as marking a Saxon 
boundary, in some such books as “ Rymer’s Faedera,” or “ Kemble’s 
Codex Diploma ticus aevi Saxonici,” which was published by the 
“ English Historical Society ; ” to these, therefore, I would dii'ect 
the attention of such members of this Society as may have leisure 
for the pleasant task. There is no mention of the tree in “ Dooms- 
day Book,” or in “ Dugdale’s Monasticon.” Whether such authority 
can or cannot be found, however, there can be little doubt, if we 
may trust to the opinions of such men as De Candolle, South, and 
Loudon, that it was an old oak at the time stated. I will not say 
that it is the oldest oak in Great Britain, because there are so 
many oldest oaks, according to various writers, that the position 
would not be one of distinction ; and in considering the numerous 
claims made to it, one is forcibly reminded of the curiosity collector 
who expressed his disgust and disappointment at not finding the 
tomahawk which killed Captain Cook in a certain museum, stating 
