This passage is also of interest as showing that soaking in salt water, as a mode of seasoning, was practised in Harrison's time.
But the importation of wainscot, or boards for ceiling, panelling, and otherwise finishing rooms, which was generally of oak, commenced three centuries before the time of Harrison. On page 204 of the Liber Albus—a book which could have been far more valuable if the editor had given us the texts, with his learned notes, instead of a translation—mention is made of "squared oak timber," brought in from the country by carts, and of course of domestic growth, as free of city duty or octroi, and of "planks of oak" coming in in the same way as paying one plank a cartload. But in the chapter on the "Customs of Billyngesgate," pp. 208, 209, relating to goods imported from foreign countries, a duty of one halfpenny is imposed on every hundred of boards called "weynscotte," and of one penny on every hundred of boards called "Rygholt." The editor explains "Rygholt" as "wood of Riga." This was doubtless pine or fir. The year in which these provisions were made does not appear, but they belong to the reign of Henry III.
[211] In a letter addressed to the Minister of Public Works, after the terrible inundations of 1857, the Emperor thus happily expressed himself: "Before we seek the remedy for an evil, we inquire into its cause. Whence come the sudden floods of our rivers? From the water which falls on the mountains, not from that which falls on the plains. The waters which fall on our fields produce but few rivulets, but those which fall on our roofs and are collected in the gutters, form small streams at once. Now, the roofs are mountains—the gutters are valleys."
"To continue the comparison," observes D'Héricourt, "roofs are smooth and impermeable, and the rain water pours rapidly off from their surfaces; but this rapidity of flow would be greatly diminished if the roofs were carpeted with mosses and grasses; more still, if they were covered with dry leaves, little shrubs, strewn branches, and other impediments—in short, if they were wooded."—Annales Forestières, Déc., 1857, p. 311.
[212] "The roots of vegetables," says D'Héricourt, "perform the office of a perpendicular drainage analogous to that which has been practised with success in Holland and in some parts of the British Islands. This system consists in driving down three or four thousand stakes upon a hectare; the rain water filters down along the stakes, and, in certain cases, as favorable results are obtained by this method as by horizontal drains."—Annales Forestières, 1857, p. 312.
[213] The productiveness of Egypt has been attributed too exclusively to the fertilizing effects of the slime deposited by the inundations of the Nile; for in that climate a liberal supply of water would produce good crops on almost any ordinary sand, while, without water, the richest soil would yield nothing. The sediment deposited annually is but a very small fraction of an inch in thickness. It is alleged that in quantity it would be hardly sufficient for a good top dressing, and that in quality it is not chemically distinguishable from the soil inches or feet below the surface. But to deny, as some writers have done, that the slime has any fertilizing properties at all, is as great an error as the opposite one of ascribing all the agricultural wealth of Egypt to that single cause of productiveness. Fine soils deposited by water are almost uniformly rich in all climates; those brought down by rivers, carried out into salt water, and then returned again by the tide, seem to be more permanently fertile than any others. The polders of the Netherland coast are of this character, and the meadows in Lincolnshire, which have been covered with slime by warping, as it is called, or admitting water over them at high tide, are remarkably productive. See Appendix, [No. 28].
[214] "The laws against clearing have never been able to prevent these operations when the proprietor found his advantage in them, and the long series of royal ordinances and decrees of parliaments, proclaimed from the days of Charlemagne to our own, with a view of securing forest property, have served only to show the impotence of legislative notion on this subject."—Clavé, Études sur l'Économie Forestière, p. 32.
"A proprietor can always contrive to clear his woods, whatever may be done to prevent him; it is a mere question of time, and a few imprudent cuttings, a few abuses of the right of pasturage, suffice to destroy a forest in spite of all regulations to the contrary."—Dunoyer, De la Liberté du Travail, ii, p. 452, as quoted by Clavé, p. 353.
Both authors agree that the preservation of the forests in France is practicable only by their transfer to the state, which alone can protect them and secure their proper treatment. It is much to be feared that even this measure would be inadequate to save the forests of the American Union. There is little respect for public property in America, and the Federal Government, certainly, would not be the proper agent of the nation for this purpose. It proved itself unable to protect the live-oak woods of Florida, which were intended to be preserved for the use of the navy, and it more than once paid contractors a high price for timber stolen from its own forests. The authorities of the individual States might be more efficient.
[215] See the lively account of the sale of a communal wood in Berlepsch, Die Alpen, Holzschläger und Flösser.