[ 27 ] 
The fpeclmen, marked 0, is from an oaken beam 
of an ancient ftable. 
The fpecimen, marked C, is from a Spanifli 
chefnut. ^ 
I think it muft immediately appear to any one, on 
infpedlion, that the fpecimens Cl. and O agree in the 
grain and texture of the wood, and that fpecimen C 
is evidently of a different kind. 
Upon weighing alfo the fpecimens C and 0, which 
are ex'adlly of the fame fize, the oak turned out to be 
heavier than the chefnut, by one fourth. 
With regard to this latter difference between the 
two woods, it may be proper to inform you, that the 
fpecimen of chefnut was taken from a young tree ; 
the grain of the oak muff have therefore been clofer 
than that of the chefnut j but, on the other hand, it 
muff be recollected, that there muff have been a very 
confiderable evaporation from the oaken beam during 
a long courfe of years. 
Dr. Ducarel, in his Anglo-Norman Antiquities^, 
hath inferted a note of fome length, to prove, that Old 
London was not only built with chefnut timber, but 
that there ffill continues a large traCl of chefnut 
woods near Sittingbourn in Kent, which he conceives 
to be a full demonftration, that this tree is indigenous 
in England. 
I had no fooner read this account, than I deter- 
mined to examine thefe woods myfelf, as well as 
what trees might be found in their neighbourhood. 
The refult of a very minute infpeCtion of them is, 
that I found thofe parts which confiffc of Spanifh 
* P. 96 . 
E 2 
chefnut 
