163 
Mr. Stanley Dobson, who spent much time trying to get at the truth in regard to these trees, 
writing to the Royal Society of Tasmania, “ believed ” that the highest found by a Government surveyor 
was near Neerim, in Gippsland, and was 325 feet. Even this was excessive, as the Sydney Morning Herald 
of January 21, 1889, gives the height as “227 feet with the top broken off, and a girth 6 feet from the 
ground of 55 feet 7 inches.” Another tree on the Blacks’ Spur, at Fernshaw, had a height of 237 feet 
6 inches, the top being broken off, the girth 6 feet from the ground being 50 feet. A still loftier tree 
was reported,—that on Mount Monda, with a height of 307 feet, and a girth 6 feet from the ground of 
22 feet 8 inches. The height given of a tree on Mount Baw Baw is 326 feet 1 inch, with a girth 
6 feet from the ground of 25 feet 7 inches. 
I am sorry I am unable to quote the authorities for these figures, and therefore my readers may 
take them for what they arc worth. They were given a few months before the “shrinkage” of the 
height of the Baron, and before the challenge to have all heights verified by a surveyor. 
In May, 1889, the Bendigo Evening News gave the height of a tree at Thorpdale, Gippsland, at 
320 feet, diameter 7 fret at a height of 12 feet above ground, and 3 feet 6 inches at 165 feet from the ground. 
One hundred and sixty-five feet of this barrel was split into palings, and produced 6,000 6-feet and 3,600 
5-feet palings. Here we have a circumstantial account of a tree reputed to be over 300 feet high, but at 
the time I could get no confirmatory particulars, although I am far from saying that the measurements 
were erroneous. At the same time, in cases like these, if records are sought to be established, they must be 
amply confirmed by independent and competent witnesses. In this case the measurement of a fallen tree 
was taken. Such measurements are usually more or less approximate, as a high tree always loses its top in 
falling, and an especially fissile timber such as this would break up and complicate the measurement. It 
will be best, if possible, to take a standing tree, measured by a surveyor, and w r e shou'd have at least two 
independent measurements. 
As regards the American trees, I cannot do better than quote the monumental “Silva of North 
America,” by Professor Sargent, which is a work of the highest value. He says :—“ The Redwood ( Sequoia 
sempervirens), which is the tallest American tree, probably occasionally attains the height of 400 feet and 
more. The tallest specimens I have measured was 340 feet high.” This is the timber so well known to us 
in New South Wales, being the best-known tree of Pacific North America. Professor Sargent goes to 
say :—■“ Among American trees the Redwood is exceeded in size only by Sequoia Wellingtonia.” Here he 
differentiates between height and bulk. 
Turning to Sequoia Wellingtonia, known in California as “ Big Tree,” Sargent says :—“Its average 
height is about 275 feet, and its trunk diameter near the ground 20 feet, although individuals from 300 feet 
to 320 feet tall, with trunks from 25 feet to 35 feet thick, are not rare. Speaking of the celebrated Calaveras 
trees, he says :—“In the Calaveras Grove there are three trees over 300feet high, the tallest measuring 
325 feet. The largest tree measured by Muir is standing in the King’s River Forest, and 4 feet above the 
srround has a diameter of 35 feet 8 inches inside the bark.” 
He also states Sequoia Wellingtonia is the largest inhabitant of the American forests, and the most 
massive-stemmed, although not the tallest tree in the world. In this passage he is not merely indicating 
that the Redwood is a taller tree, but I believe he is referring also to the Australian trees, which he, 
from reports, believes to be taller. 
Professor Sargent is an eminent authority on (he subject of which he treats, and in view of the 
actual measurement that he presents, viz., 340 feet in height for a Redwood and a girth round the trunk 
of 107 feet for its congener, the “ Big Tree,” I am of opinion that, so far as our knowledge goes at present, 
California is the home both of the tallest and of the broadest trees in the world. 
Later on, through the courtesy of Mr. A. W. Crooke, the Acting Conservator 
of Forests, Victoria, I became aware of the existence of a folio work, of which but 
a few copies were issued. Following is the whole of the text. It has eight plates, 
two of which—Nos. 4 and 8—are reproduced. 
There is no imprint and no date, nor any author given; but it is, apparently, 
the joint work of J. Duncan Pierce, C.E., and C. 11. Cunningham, surveyor. 
B 
