ral PREFACE. 
Natives ; but those of the present generation rarely evince the slightest interest 
in the subject, and can rarely state the names of any except the commonest 
kinds, so that the total loss of many names need cause little surprise. Another 
difficulty lies in the application of different names to the same plant, and, con- 
versely, in the application of the same name to different plants. 
When this work was somewhat advanced I ventured to forward a list of 
Maori names, which had been obtained from various sources, to W. Colenso, 
Esq., F.R.S., with a request that he would oblige me by correcting any obvious 
errors: this he very generously consented to do, and returned the catalogue with 
corrections and additional names quite new to me. After page 45 I have 
regularly indicated all Native names inserted on Mr. Colenso’s authority. To 
the Ven. Archdeacon W. L. Williams I am specially indebted for a valuable 
catalogue of Native names, more particularly of those used in the East Cape 
District; and I have also to express my acknowledgments to C. Traill, Esq., 
for a list of names used by the Stewart Island Maoris. 
In the great majority of cases the Maori names are much better adapted 
for commercial use than those commonly employed; happily, no attempt has 
been made to replace ‘‘ kauri,’ but the unmeaning names of ‘‘ red-pine,”’ 
‘‘black-pine,”” ‘! white-pine,’”’ &c., are inferior to rimu, mata1, and kahikatea, as 
they are employed in other countries to distinguish different kinds of timber, 
and are moreover liable to be confused with each other. This is shown by the 
fact that the red-pine of the Nelson district is termed black-pine in other parts 
of the colony. 
In most cases, therefore, it appears preferable to adopt the ordinary Native 
names as the common names, but a notable exception will be observed in the 
beeches—the Native name ‘ tawai’”’ or ‘‘tawhai’’ is used as a generic term to 
include all the species, and is not capable of being applied with precision. It 
is therefore proposed to term the different kinds ‘‘tooth-leaved beech,” ‘‘entire- 
leaved beech,” ‘ silver-beech,” &c., as indicated under the description of each. 
Reference has already been made to the trouble arising from the misleading 
ordinary names, ‘‘red-birch,” ‘‘ white-birch,” &c., applied to these timbers. 
In other instances it may be found convenient to substitute a common 
name for that employed by the Natives for the sake of brevity. For instance, 
‘fuchsia’? may advantageously replace ‘‘kohutuhutu;’’ but cases of this kind 
are very few. 
As doubts have been expressed respecting the possibility of substituting the 
names of tooth-leaved beech, silver-beech, &c., for ‘‘ red-birch,’”’ ‘* white-birch,”’ 
&c,, it may be pointed out that if the proposed names are uniformly employed 
by the officers of the Public Works, Survey, and Railway Departments, they 
will speedily come into commercial use and be generally adopted. 
ON THE ASCERTAINED STRENGTH OF NEw ZEALAND TIMBERS. 
The information at my disposal on this subject is less complete in all cases 
than could be desired, and in some instances is very defective. In 1865 the late 
Mr. J. Melville Balfour, Marine Engineer, prepared a report embodying the 
results of a series of Experiments on the Strength of New Zealand Woods, 
which exhibits a vast amount of careful and patient labour. Until lately it was 
the only authority on the actual and relative strength of New Zealand timbers, 
but in 1879 Mr. W. N. Blair, Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Depart- 
ment, published the results of experiments made to determine the strength of 
Otago timbers. The series of experiments on kauri, conducted by Mr. I. 
Laslett, Timber Inspector to the British Admiralty, is, however, of the highest 
