Norwich bulletin., 1921-01-29

The American Forestry association's attempt to ''eIect" national tree eyol1es thoughts of the difficulties attending the task. Yet if 1t fuinlls no other purpose than to inspire study of the value of trees and the part they play in our natural economics, 1t may be worth while. To choose a tree that will represent all parts of America would be practically impossible task. If. ito be representative, it is to be required that it shall grow in some portion of every state, nearly every tree possessing dignity or distinction will be excluded The maple Is said to be in high favor because of it's wide distribu- tion and it's undoubted utility, but it is necessary to include many of it's 70 va- rieties under one heading in order to ob- tain the universality that some electors desire. The obstacles are at least as nu- merous as those which have prevented selection of national flower. For long time we tried this. but never were able to agree. Toward the close of the contest the goldenrod and the daisy were leading in favor, but the choice was put off and the question has been forgotten.
 It may not be necessary as has been suggested, to insist that our national tree shall possess both beauty and util-
 
 of the former virtue. But in utility, if not in habitat, 1t ought to be widely va ried. and there is merit in the proposal ] that it shall be chosen also because it possesses some quality representative of l the American people as a whole. The 1 field of choice is not perceptibly narrow ed by the most exacting restrictions It is possible with a little imagination to construct~a symbolism for any tree that 1 fs likely to be named. The oak Is sturdy and long-lfved; the hickory has claim to residence running back to the era prior to the ice age and is probably fhe veteran of them ali; the elm resides where our population is densest the cedar l Is highly durable and useful; the birct is pre-eminently the tree of the Ameri. ! can boy, and the hr is destined to enter 1 into construction of American homes
 more largely than any of its companions l If the northwest presents candidate we may take it for granted that 1t vii
 be the Douglas fir. Yet if we were ben
 on honoring David Douglas, the botanis
 and explorer, whose amazing labors il
 the second decade of the 18th century dit so much to enlighten the world as to tn, riches of this section, 1t would be neces isary to remember that it was not Doug las own favorite. That scientist ha,
 another predilection, as Prof. F. c Young pointed out when he said:
 It will be remembered that 1t Is thi Douglas for whom the Douglas spruc (Pseudotsuga' DouglasiD was named While it is quite fitting that the tree tha
 Is the monarch of the forest of the Pa ciic northwsst--the largest and most i'm l. portant timber tree-should bear tn name of this indefatigable explorer of tn , flora and fauna of the region, yet tn reader of his journals and letters will b , struck with the fact that it is the suga , pine (Pinus Lembertiana) that impresse him most He was virtually a worshippt , of 1t There was no limit to the sacrifc , | he was willing to make to secure spec 7 mems of It's cones and twigs. Havin found 1t, he went into raptures over it. 5 Douglas himself said in a letter to D Hooker of the society under whose dire ! ton his scientific observations were col ducted.
 t rejoice to tell you of new species pinus, the most princely of the genu s perhaps even the Erandest specimen
 vegetation, It attains the enormol