. t 25 ] 
I have alio been Informed by you, that In Spain the 
chefnut trees, deftined to produce the beft fruit, are 
engrafted upon the wild chefnut, and that the 
French call the common fort chataignier^ and the im- 
proved one maronier. 
Though fo much hath been fald of late, with re- 
gard to the excellence of this wood for building, I 
cannot, upon inquiry, find that it is greatly prized for 
this purpofe either in Spain, Italy, or the South of 
France j but is chiefly valued for the fruit, which 
forms a confiderable article of food for the inhabit- 
ants, as well as of exportation. 
I likewife cannot hear that this tree is to be found 
in any confiderable maflTes, till the traveller is at leafl: 
two hundred miles to the fouth of Paris. 
With us the nuts by no means ripen kindly, though 
I have fometimes eaten them very good from Englifh 
trees. 
In Scotland, neither the walnut nor chefnut pro- 
duce good . fruit, though there are fome very fine and 
promifing timber trees, of the latter kind, at the Earl 
of Bredal bane’s, in the Highlands. 
All thefe circumftances feem to afford a ftrong in- 
ference, that the Spanifh chefnut cannot be a native 
of Great Britain ; but I mufl; now confider the proofs 
which are generally adduced to the contrary. 
Mr. Miller (in his Gardener’s Didfionary) hath en- 
deavoured to prove, that the Spanifh chefnut grew in 
great profufion to the northward of London, by a 
citation from Fitz-Stevens, which only implies, that 
there were large forefts in the neighbourhood of the 
metropolis, without either the chefnut, or any other 
tree, being fpecified. ^ Proxime patet forefla ingens, 
VoL. LIX. '* E “ faltus 
I 
