Ujefulnefs of wa/hing the Stems of Trees., 45 ;; 
yet I have an Oak now two hundred years old * (1780) which 
is fixteen feet and five inches in circumference, or one hundred 
and ninety-feven inches in two’ hundred years. But this Oak 
cannot properly be called old. The annual increafe of very 
old trees is hardly meafurable with a firing, as the flighted; 
change of the air will affeT the firing more than a year’s 
growth. The largefl trees that I have meafured are fo far from 
me, that I have had no opportunity of meafuring them a fe» 
cond time, except the Oak near the honourable Mr. legge’s 
Lodge in Holt Forcft, which does not fhow to be hollow. In 
1759 I found it was at feven feet (for a large fwelling rendered 
it unfair to meafure at five or fix feet) a trifle above thirty- four 
feet in circumference, and in 1778 I found it had not increafed 
above half an inch in nineteen years. This more entire remain 
of longevity merits fome regard from the lovers of trees, as- 
well as the hollow Oak at Cowthorp in Yorkfhire, which Dr., 
hunter gives an account of in his edition of Evelyn’s Silva, 
and calls it forty-eight feet round at three feet.. I did not mea- 
fure it fo low * but in 1768 I found it at four feet, forty feet 
and fix inches and at five feet, thirty-fix feet and fix inches ; 
and at fix feet, thirty-two feet and one inch.. Now, although, 
this Oak is larger near the earth than that in Hampfhire, yet it 
diminiflies much more fuddenly in girt, viz. eight feet and five 
inches in two feet of height (I reckon by my own meafures as 
I took pains to, be exact). Suppofe the diminution continues 
about this rate (for I did not meafure fo high) then at feven. feet it 
will be about twenty- eight feet in circumference, and the bottom 
* I cannot miftake in the age of this Oak,, as I have the deed' between: my 
anceftor Robert mars ham and the Copyhold' Tenants of his Manor of Stratton,, 
dated May 2©, 1580, upon bis then, iaclofing fame ©£ his -wake j and the abuttal 
is clear. 
fourteen 
7 
