The Hawke's Bay Herald FRIDAY, JANUARY 13, 1899. FORESTS AND RAINFALL.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 11121, 13 January 1899, Page 2

The Hawke's Bay Herald FRIDAY, JANUARY 13, 1899. FORESTS AND RAINFALL.

It 5b a popular belief that the destruction of forests decreases the rainfall, Under that belief the Government of New Zealand lias been repeatedly urged to make forest reserves here and there, as if the preservation of a few hundred acres of trees would compensate for the hundreds of thousands cleared. But is there any ground for the assumption that forests attract rain ? Mr Eussell, the Government Astronomer of New South Wales, declares that there is not. Dr. Ross, M.L.C., recently asked the Colonial Secretary to ascertain as far as possible : — 1. The probable cause of the frequent recurrence of late years of " these havocproducing droughts." 2. The effect of the wholesale deforestation and ringbarking upon the atmosphere. 3. Whether droughts are more severe in "rung" than in "unrung" country and 4. What districts have been moat severely and continuously affected by drought of late years. This, in commercial parlance, was a rather large order. The first question was the most difficult, and it must be admitted that' the answer was somewhat vague. It was to the effect that the climatic conditions of the tropics governed the rainfall of the temperate regions. If the monsoon season be wet, then the trade winds distribute the beneficial moisture; but if dry, strong per- • sistent Horth-weßt winds prevail in Australia, sucking all moisture from the soil. That may be quite correct, but what causes a wet or dry monsoon season ? Dr. Itussell jibs at that, merely suggesting that the source of this tropical energy is outside the earth, When he comes to the other questions, however, Mr Bussell has more data to guide him. It follows that if his monsoon theory he correct, then the deforestation of a country has no effect on the rainfall. Meteorological statistics in Australia have been collected for a period sufficient to form some kind of a guide, and Mr Eussell declares that, at any rate so far as New South Wales is concerned, experience goes to prove that the destruction of trees has not decreased the rainfall — has rather increased it. As an argument in support of this theory he points to the fact that in recent droughts those districts which have suffered most heavily, viz., Western Eiverina and the Darling, have practically done no ring-barking. He goes on to point out that even down there the Beverity of the drought has been exaggerated by contrast with the abundant years of 1889 and 1894, and generally that New South Wales droughts have not been so numerous or severe during the past ten years as in other periods. Mr Kussell's conclusions having been disputed, more in general than local grounds, he replied to his critics through the Press. He says that early in this century it was hotly contended in England that the destruction of forests, due to the expansion of commerce and increase of population, had caused a marked decrease in the rainfall, and at the cost of the Marquis of Twesdale a prize was offered for the best essay on the subject, " Whether the Bainfall of Western Europe had undergone any Change." The judges were the Council of the Meteorological Society of Scotland, and the conclusion they arrived at from the essays before them was that, '' There were no grounds for thinking that the rainfall of Western "Europe had undergone any change." With the same object Mr Symons, the best authority in Europe on rainfall, examined the Paris and London rain jecords, the oldest in existence, and he came to the conclusion that there was no evidence to show that the rainfall was decreasing. A similar investigation was made in America by the Smithsonian Institute, the highest authority there on scientific questions. In the United States forest destruction had gone on at a rate altogether eclipsing any previous efforts at forest destruction, and the conclusion arrived at was, "There was no evidence to show that the rainfall was decreasing," and a comparison was made of the rainfall "in the magnificent foreßt from Minnesota to Maine with that of the almost treeless plainß extending westward to Chicago, and it was found that the rainfall of the two areas was ''precisely identical," "There is," continues Mr Bussell, "one minor, but interesting phase or the question. We have large areas in this and the neighboring colonies, where the forest is so thick that it will not pay to clear it away. Yet these very rain-traps secure no more rain than the bare country j as I know by actual experiment carried on in one forest for a number of years, and in the dry time they suffer from drought, just as the cleared country does. This is another fact which the theorists might explain, I could easily multiply such evidence as the result of examination by scientific and unbiassed authorities, but although a careful student of both sides of the question, I have never yet found any evidence worthy of the name put forward in proof of the statement that the destruction of forests cause a decrease in the rainfall — statements many I have read, but never one supported by evidence. They have been pure and simple statements of opinion." An old proverb says an ounce of fact is worth a ponnd of theory. Presumably the meteorological returns of New South Wales bear out MrEussell'seontention. We have not available the \ returns for New Zealand for a sufficient period to test bis conclusions co far as this colony is concerned. Occasionally one hears an old settler declare that in the early days the rainfall was greater, or at any rate that it was more equitable. But a little investigation throws some doubt on this conclusion. There is no disputing the fact that periods of drought are felt more acutely. But is it not equally indisputable that our lowlying lands near the coast are more subject to floods f And are not both these apparently contradictory facts aseribable to the fact that the clearing of the country of fern and scrub, as well as of I'orest, allow the rainfall to escape mo&e rapidly through the natural outlet .of the rivers? Then, again, we stock the .country severely, and a period of dry weather, unaeccompanied by growth in the herbage, makes itself much more severely felt that when comparatively £ew sheep and cattle had wide areas over which to depasture. We do not assert that Mr Russell's conclusions are correct. But they are made by one whose special study has been the climatic condition of Australia — his title of •' Astronomer " being an absurd miußomer — and they are entitled to weight. We should like to hear the opinion of soine of our old colonists, backed if possible by accurate returns of the rainfall, on this interesting subject,

nen so constituted that a question oi j irecedence assumes ia their minds iii importance amazing to an orlinary .mortal Some time ago an admiral on the Australian squadron :oo k offence at what he regarded as i slight, because a Chief Justice or somebody else was allowed to walk n front of him at some State func:ion, and the Home authorities were nvoked to settle the vexed question. "We forget the result. Perhaps ;he answer was as tactful aB the ieeision of. the P. and 0. captain who was called upon to declare tvhich. of two ladies of apparently equal rank was entitled to the place of honor at his table. He could not End any social code to guide him, so he blandly declared that the eldest had the precedence. Singularly enough the contest then resolved itself into who should go second, The Kaiser is dominated by such petty considerations. A cable message the other day stated that the Federal Council of the German Empire had decided in favor of the Emperor in his dispute with Prince Ernst of Lippe-Det-mold, a petty principality with a population of less than 100,000 souls. The origin of the trouble is explained by papers received by the laßt mail. Prince Alexander, who succeeded to the throne of LippeDetmold in 1895, is incapacitated by a mental malady fr'6in discharging the dutieß of Mb position. There were several claimants for the regency, one of whom, Prince Adolphe of Schaumberg-Lippe, "was the brother-in-law of the German Emperor, and all the influence of Berlin was thrown into the scale in support of his candidature. The question was referred to the Supreme Court of the Empire, but the Prussian representatives in the Federal Council secured the defeat of a proposal to provide the Court with the necessary powers for deciding the isßue. A Court of Arbitration was ultimately appointed under the presidency of the King oi Saxony, and pronounced in favor oi the present Eegent, Count Ernst, Prince Adolphe of SchaumbergLippe, who had been Eegent ia the intervals, accordingly resigned. "Unfortunately, the German Emperor discovered* a petty. means of annoying the "Regent who had defeated his favorite candidate in the Arbitration Court, for the troops which are raised in the principality are drafted into the Prussian army under the terms of a military convention between Prussia and LippeDetmold, and the principality is garrisoned with Prussian troops. The device employed by the Kaiser was as undignified as his object. For, acting in the capacity of Com-mander-in-Cbief of the army, he instructed the troops in Lippe-Det-mold to withhold from the membera of the Begent's family the military honors which are customarily paid to the families of reigning princes, This insult not unnaturally elicited a protest from the Eegent. "who sent a respectful remonstrance to the Emperor. The reply was only an aggravation of the original affront, for the Eegent was told by telegram (a favorite method of communication of the Kaiser's) that the General of the garrison had acted under his orders, and he was forbidden to address the Emperor on the subject again. The Prince appealed to the Federal Council. The decision was that the succession was not hereditary, but was vested in the Council. This seems rather like begging the question,, but as the cable added that the decision waß regarded throughout Germany as a victory for the Kaiser, we assume that as an hereditary Prince the Segent would have been entitled" to claim the . honors desired by him, while if the position were not hereditary he would not have that claim. But to plain mortals o£ the common or field variety the dispute will look very like the old argument as to the difference between tweedle-dee and tsveedle-dum. THE AGAPEMONE. A cable message in yesterday's issue announced the death of Henry Jamee Prince, the founder of the Agapemone, an institution at Charlinch, Somersetshire. This announcement carries one back to"the early history of Christianity, when agapre, oi " love-feasts," were commonly held in connection with the Lord'f Supper. The early Christians were as a rule of the poorest class, but there were some wealthy members, and it was their custom to provide b feast for their poorer brethren. Prayers were said, hymns sung, and church business discussed, and the meetings closed with the holy kiss.' 1 Both the Lord's Supper and the agapse were at first celebrated in the evening, but when the Christians were persecuted they held their services before dawn, and the communion followed — hence the custom in the Roman Catholic and Anglican communities of "'early communion." The agapte became somewhat riotous feasts, and were soon separated from the communion. In the fourth century they had degenerated into scenes of debauchery, and successive Councils declared against them, and forbade the clergy to take part in them. To some extent they survive in the " love feasts " of some Nonconformist bodies, and in the tea meetings more or less associated with all sects. The Agapemone, or " love abode " is a community of Christians who contend that they carry out the idea of the original Church. They hold all goods in common, and practice what is known as the "spiritual marriage," in which the sexual element is eliminated. Mr Prince was a clergyman of the Established Church, and founded the community in 1859. It still exists, we believe, on a small scale. It will be found described in Hepworth Dixon's "Spiritual "Wives."