ON THE FORMATION OF WOOD. 
“ Cork-tree, no increase; annual average, one and a half inches, 
“ Oak, planted in 1809 ; no increase. 
“ Fraxinus heterophylhis ; no increase. 
“ Many others of large dimensions, whose average is about one inch, have scarcely increased over 
a quarter of an inch. 
“ On referring to my indications of the spring, I do not consider it at all a backward season. 
Indeed, it appears that trees appeared in leaf, in some cases, even before medium time, and the 
appearance of birds and insects was n nowise late. 
“ I inclose the measurement of a very fine Cedar of Lebanon, planted at Stratton Strawless in 1747? 
taken in the years 1837 and 1850. It is a most magnificent specimen, and, for its age, I should think 
the finest in England. Its girth in 1851, at five feet from the ground, was twelve feet three and 
a half inches. It has averaged about one and a half inches increase for the last four years, but this 
year there is no increase. 
“ CEDAR OF LEBANON AT STRATTON STRAWLESS, PLANTED IN 1747, MEASURED 
“ In 1837. 
1st length, 41 ft.: at 20 ft. 6 in. the girth was 11 ft. 2 
in.; squared, 2 ft. 3| in.; giving a content of 319 ft. 
6 in. 4 pts. (No knots in this length). 
2nd length, 10 ft. : at 5 ft. its girth was 4 ft. lOyn.; 
squared, 14J in. ; giving a content of 14 ft. 7 in. 
(Some branches taken off caused a swell). 
3rd length, 10 ft.: at 5 ft. the girth was 4 ft; squared, 
1 ft.; giving a content of 10 ft. (This was the first 
length in crown.) 
4th length, 10 ft. : at 5 ft. its girth was 3 ft. 6 in.; 
squared, 9 in.; giving a content of 5 ft. 7 in. 6 pts. 
(Second length in crown.) 
“ The total length of the tree, measuring timber, is 71 ft., and the contents over the bark, in 1837, 
849 ft. 9 in.; in 1850, 403 ft. 4 in. 5 pts. Increase in thirteen years, 53 ft. 7 in. 5 pts. 
In 1850. 
The girth was 11 ft. 8 in. ; squared, 2 ft. 11 in.; giving 
a content of 34S ft. 9 in. 5 pts. 
The girth was 6 ft. 4 in. ; squared, 19 in.; giving a 
content of 25 ft. 0 in. 10 pts. 
The girth was 5 ft. 4 in.; squared, 16 in.; giving a 
content of 17 ft. 9 in. 4 pts. 
The girth was 4 ft. 4 in.; squared, 13 in.; giving a 
content of 11 ft. 8 in. 10 pts. 
Increase. 
29 ft. 3 in. 1 pt. 
10 ft. 5 in. 8 pts. 
7 ft. 9 in. 4 pts. 
6 ft. 1 in. 4 pts. 
“ In 1837. 
1st wrong, 12 ft. long; squared, 15 in.; girth, 5 ft.; 
giving a content of 18 ft. 9 in. 
2nd wrong, 10 ft. long; squared, 12 in.; girth, 4 ft. ; 
giving a content of 10 ft. 
3rd wrong, 12 ft. long; squared, 9 in.; girth 3 ft; 
content, 6 ft. 9 in. 
4th wrong, 10 ft. ; squared, 9 in.; girth, 3 ft.; con¬ 
tent, 5 ft. 7 in. 6 pts. 
5th wrong, 14 ft.; squared, 8 in.; girths, 2 ft.; con¬ 
tent, 2 ft. 2 in. 8 pts. 
6th wrong, nil. 
In 1850. 
1st length of do., 10 ft. ; at 5 ft., girth, 6 ft. 8 in.; 
squared, 20 in.; contents, 27 ft. 9 in. 4 pts. 2nd 
length, iO ft.; at 5 ft., girths, 4 ft.; squares, 12 in. ; 
contents, 10 ft. 3rd length, 10 ft. ; at 5 ft., girth, 
3 ft ; squared, 10 in.; contents, 6 ft. 11 in. 4 pts.= 
44 ft. 8 in. 8 pts. 
1st length of do., 16 ft.; at 8 ft., girth, 3 ft. 6 in. ; 
squared, 10J in.; contents, 12 ft. 3 in. 2nd length, 
15 ft. ; at 7 3 ft., girth, 3 ft. 4 in. ; squared, 10 in.; 
contents, 10 ft. 5 in.=22 ft. 8 in. 
16 ft.; at 8 ft., girth, 4 ft.; squared, 12 in.; content, 
16 ft. 
10 ft. ; at 5 ft., girth, 3 ft.; squared, 9 in.; content, 
5 ft. 7 in. 6 pts. 
15 ft.; at 7^ ft., girth, 2 ft.; squared, 6 in.; content, 
3 ft. 9 in. 
4 ft.; at 2 ft., girth, 2 ft.; squared, 6 in. ; content, 
2 ft. 
Increase. 
25 ft. 11 in. 8 pt. 
12 ft. 8 in. 
9 ft. 3 in. 
nil. 
1 ft. 6 in. 4 pts. 
2 ft. 
“ The whole contents of wrongs, iii 1837, 43 ft. 4 in. 2 pts.; in 1850, 94 ft. 9 in, 2 pts. 
“ The whole tree contained:—In 1837, 393 ft. 1 in. 2 pts. of timber, which is—9 load 33 ft. 1 pt. 
In 1850, 498 ft. 1 in. 7 pts. of timber, which is—12 load 18 ft. 8 pts. 
“ The total increase, in thirteen years, is 2 load 25 ft. 8 pts/’ 
ON THE FORMATION OE WOOD. 
^1EW questions in vegetable physiology have given rise to more discussion than this, and, after all, 
A as it seems to us, owing to the very imperfect manner in which most of those who have undertaken 
to offer an opinion have previously investigated the facts offered by nature. Much confusion, again, 
arises from the misinterpretation of words, and the figurative expressions to which the transcendental 
physiologists have had recourse in endeavouring to explain their views. 
The two theories wdiich are now most strongly put forth in opposition to each other are—1, That the 
■wood grows down from the leaves ; and, 2, That the wood is formed in the place in which it is found 
when complete. Now, the first of these, if taken in its literal sense, is simply an absurdity, because it 
is directly opposed to the well-established fact, that there exists no free space between the wood and 
--- 
