heat of the fun, as well as to intenfe cold in winter; and thefe bridges are known to have exifted
for an immenfe number of years, and may have been built centuries ago. They appear never to
have had any aid from painting. In all the old temples in Cafhmere, where wood is employed, the
Deodar alone is ufed, and the antiquity of fome of the temples is very great indeed. When my regiment
was ordered to be cantoned at Jhelum, in the Punjaub, after the laft campaign, we had to build
houfes for ourfelves, and lines for our men to live in. I procured the Deodar timber from the hills
bordering on Cafhmere, as being confidered the kind of wood beft adapted for building purpofes, both on
account of its durability, and as being lefs likely to fuffer from white ants." Almoft all the boats in the
valley of Cafhmere are built of Deodar; and when they get crazy at the joinings by age, the old planks
have their weathered furface planed off by the adze, and are then undiftinguifliable from the new wood
with which they are repaired. Dr Jamefon, in the Report above referred to, tells us that, " on the banks of
the Jhelum, Chenab, and Ravee rivers, extenfive boat manufactories exift. The beft and moft expenfive
are built entirely of Deodar. An inferior kind is made with the outfide of Deodar, and the infide of Cheer
(the wood of Finns longifolia). Thefe boats will laft from 20 to 30 years. Dr Jamefon adds that the
only tree in the Britifh Himmalayas which produces timber fitted for fpars of (hips is the Deodar, all
others being too foft, or too eafily acted upon by the weather. A requifition for fpars of the Deodar 80 to
90 feet long, made by the Superintendent of Marine at Bombay, could not be fupplied, folely on account
of the difficulty of tranfportation, owing to the falls on the Sutlej, and the rugged and inacceffible nature of
the country." It is faid alfo to have little tendency to warp, a quality efpecially valuable for boats, and
probably due to the ftraightnefs of the grain of the timber. On fome other points, where one would think
there ought to be no uncertainty, we have fomewhat contradictory reports. One writer fays, " The wood
is fo ftraight and equal in the grain, that it gives planks 3 feet broad, fimply by the action of the wedge.
Timber-faws are unknown in the Himmalayas." While, on the other hand, Major Madden writes, " It
takes the faw kindly, but will not fplit into planks." Again, he fays, " It has the advantage of requiring
little or no feafoning;" but, at the fame time, he quotes an opinion from Mr Mines to the effat that, " if
cut young, it will foon decay when in contact with much damp." Dr Royle dwells on the fine grain of the
wood, fo clofe that the annular rings can fcarcely be counted, while other writers fpeak of the opennefs of
the grain.
Out of all this, one thing feems clear beyond difpute, and that is, that the timber of the full-grown
Deodar in its native country is extremely durable. That its ftrength is confiderable feems proved. People
would not make bridges, temples, houfes, and boats of a wood that was deficient in ftrength. Still, it may
be only relatively ftrong. It may be the beft of the Himmalayan woods ; but there is nothing to hinder
bad being the beft. The next ftrongeft feems to be the Pinns longifolia (or Cheer), and this is known to
be a foft and inferior wood. A trial of the two, made by Major Abbot, (hewed their relative ftrength to be
in the ratio of .593 (for Pinns longifolia) to .760 (for the Deodar). We ftill want further experiments to teft
the actual comparative ftrength of the Deodar itfelf, efpecially of that grown in this country. It is not eafy
to get a good large piece of wood to experiment upon. A large piece, which was being fent to the Great
Exhibition in 1851, unfortunately fell into the river Hoogly as it was being hoifted into the (hip with other
timbers. None was fent to the Exhibition of 1862. The experiments which have been made, however,
tend to (hew that, although by no means a firft-clafs wood, the Deodar is not greatly behind the Britilh
Larch in ftrength. Dr Royle records the following refults of experiments by Captain Jones, although he
can fcarcely have been aware of their bearing, for had he been fo, he muft have feen that they were fatal to
the claims of the Deodar to be a firft-clafs timber. He tells us that Captain W. Jones, of the Bengal
Engineers, found, by repeated experiment, that pieces of feafoned Deodar timber, of good ftraightgrained
wood, 4 feet in length and 2 inches in breadth, broke with weights of 1588 lb., 1636 lb., and
1540 lb. ; while pieces of 8 feet long, 2! and 3 inches thick, broke, the crofs-grained with 1092 lb., the
fine-grained at 1188 lb. and 1700 lb.; but that knotty pieces broke at 750 lb. and 964 lb.; while fpccimens
of the fame length and thicknefs, but which had been cut only one month, broke at 829, 908, 964, 1028, and
1 1 16
1 1 16 lb., the two latter from the heart of the tree, the others from the outfide of the tree. Now, we know
the breaking weight of a piece of Britifh Oak of the fame fize is between 5000 lb. and 6000 lb., (hewing that
it is at leaft five times ftronger than the Deodar. But as Mr Wilfon Saunders put the cafe, in the opinion
on the appearance of the Deodar, which he is reported to have given above, woods for (hipping purpofes
may be divided into hard woods, foft woods, and intermediate woods. He inftanced the Larch as an intermediate
wood, and thought that the Deodar might rank higher than the Larch. But Mr Saunders
has fubfequently afcertained that in this he was in error, the relative breaking weight of the Britilh
Larch to that of the Deodar being as 168 lb. to 154 lb.; and we have reafon to know that he has confiderably
modified the favourable opinion which he then expreffed of the Deodar as a w6od fitted for
naval purpofes.
In a recent article in the Gardeners' Chronicle (Jan. 1864), Mr Saunders details the refults of experiments
fince made by him, from which the pofition of the Deodar, as regards refiftance of breakage, will be feen. H e
took lengths of each of the woods enumerated in the following table, carefully fquarcd to ij inch, and fubmitted
them to the preffure of weights pendent from the centre, the lengths being fupported between ftandards
exactly fix feet apart. The weight at which each broke, and the amount of deflexion from the horizontal
line at the time of breaking, are given in the following table :—
ib.
Douglas Fir, . . . . 280 4 frafture, rough and long.
Pitch Pine, . . . . 280 4- „ fliort and even.
Canada Spruce, 196 4-7 „ fhort and rough.
Red Pine, . . . . 168 6. „ rough.
Britifh Larch, . . . . 168 5-2 fhort and even.
Deodar from Himmalayas, '54 3-8 „ fhort."
The fpecimens experimented on were carefully felected from the beft defcription of wood, and free
from all defects. The deflexion is in inches and tenths of an inch. Each wood had two trials, and the
figures give a meanrefult. He found that not only is the Deodar fomewhat weaker than the Britilh Larch,
and of courfe ftill weaker than the Hackmatac or American Larch, but it is alfo more deficient in tenacity.
With him, as in our experiment, the Deodar, when it broke, did not give way (lowly, toughly, and almoft
imperceptibly, but fnapped fhort and brittle, fending its fragments leaping into the air. We imagine,
therefore, that it muft now be admitted, that however valuable the Deodar may be as a lovely addition to
our hardy evergreens, and a ufeful fecond-clafs wood, we muft difmifs all expectations of its ever being a
fuitable fubftitute for the Oak, or of its being of much value for naval purpofes.
There are other purpofes, however, for which we fhould think its qualities peculiarly adapt it. For
many of the purpofes for which the Larch is ufed, it may be found even better adapted than it. With nearly
the fame degree of ftrength, it has much more durability, and therefore it feems peculiarly fuited for palings,
fleepers for railways, roofing for houfes, &c.; in fact, every purpofe where durability under expofure is more
wanted than great ftrength. It will alfo be found, in fheltered fituations, in fome refpects well fitted for a
nurfe. The Scotch Pine is fo heavy and compact in its foliage that it keeps off light from the deciduous
trees which grow among it, and offers great obftruction to the free circulation of air, doing about as much
harm in this way as it effects good by giving fhelter from heavy gales. Its poles, too, are fo bad, that they
muft always bear a low price in the timber market, being fit for little except for pit props, for which the
thinnings are chiefly ufeful. Larch, which is a far better nurfe, becaufe its light airy foliage and pyramidal
form offer no hindrance to the action of light and the free circulation of air, and whofe poles ufually fetch
a good price, has the fault of being deftitute of leaves in the early fpring, and is, moreover, subject to the
myfterious and incurable " rot." On the other hand, the Deodar combines the graceful form of the Larch
with the evergreen character of the Scotch Pine. The chief objections to it as a nurfe are its comparatively
flow growth and its inability to bear wind. It has not half the rapid growth of the Larch in its young ftate,
and not even nearly that of Auftriaca and Laricio. But its incapacity to (land wind is a ftill more ferious
[ 9 ] 1 objection