THE DURABILITY OF NEW ZEALAND TIMBERS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1159, 14 February 1874, Page 6

THE DURABILITY OF NEW ZEALAND TIMBERS.

Referring to a paper by the Rev. J. 0. Halcombe, read at the Nelson Exhibition, upon the durability of the New Zealand woods, the Wellington Evening Post says :—: —

"Mr Halcombe points out that, owing to the greater care and forethought exercised in Europe, where timber always has been and still is largely used for building pxirposes, the wooden edifices last as many centuries as those of New Zealand decades, or in some cases, years. He rejects the theory that this difference in durability is owing to the superiority of the European timber, maintaining that when properly treated the woods of New Zealand are equal to any in the world, and he attributes the very perishable nature of our wooden buildings, lstly, to wrong treatment of the timber itself; 2udly, to defective architectural designs ; and, 3rdly, to faults in the constructive details. Under the first head, it is pointed out that the treatment to which our timber commonly is subjected would cause the best English oak to perish in a few years, that any timber if felled when the sap is in active motion is rapidly destroyed by dry rot, that the only proper time for felling in this country is, therefore, during the months of May and June, the timber even then requiring due seasoning both in bulk for twelve months, and also after being sawn up, before use, to acquire that condition which alone can ensure its lasting. Those competent to judge deem our New Zealand totaira, kauri, and matai (to which list some add several other woods), ' although not so tough and strong, are quite as durable as English oak and chestnut.' But all timber in Europe is felled during the depth of winter, when the sap is at rest, whereaa here, as Mr Halcombe truly

remflirka, ' the aawjers prefer it full of sap', as- being in that state easier to cat* and anyone may have seen sawn timber being used in buildings with the sap oozing out tinder every blow of the hammer on the nails. And then people blame the timber for not lasting. . . Timber merchants might do much toremedy this fault, though they are not likely to do it until the final pay-masters, the owners of buildings, insist on its being done, and are ready to pay proportionately to the increased value of the material.' We earnestly commend these considerations to our local architects and builders. Let us use concrete wherever available, but when we must use timber, let us at least take all possible precaution to render it as durable as possible."