Remarks on Animals destructive to Fruit Trees

Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Volume 9, 1876, Page 631

Remarks on Animals destructive to Fruit Trees Archdeacon Stock stated that the beetle exhibited by Mr. Travers had been known in Wellington for a period of eight years, and that Mr. Huntley had called attention to its ravages among the young fruit trees. The President said that Mr. Huntley had read a paper on the subject (Vol. I., p. 29) before this Society, which was illustrated by a series of specimens now in the Colonial Museum. The subject, however, was far from being exhausted. He considered communications of this kind valuable to the Society, because natural history is, after all, a mere record of such observations as those described by Mr. Travers. 2. Mr. Kirk said that, at the request of the President, he had much pleasure in calling the attention of members to a beautiful pot-plant (Medicago marginata), sent over from Government House by Lady Normanby for inspection. It was generally known as the “Snail plant,” from a peculiarity in its legumes, which are coiled round in the form of a disc, with coherent inner margins. This was the first time he had met with this plant in the Colony. 3. “On the Longitude of Wellington Observatory,” by the Venerable Archdeacon Stock, B.A. (Transactions, p. 217.) In reply to a question from Mr. Thomson as to whether he had compared the personal error, the author stated that, unless he had gone to Sydney, such a comparison would be impossible; and, moreover, for all practical purposes it was quite unnecessary, as the personal error was never more than one-third of a second in reliable work, and that he considered absolute longitude a mathematical impossibility. Mr. Thomson said it was usual to compare the personal error, and that in the absence of such comparison he considered the observations very incomplete.

Dr. Hector took the opportunity of bearing testimony to the value of the Venerable Archdeacon Stock's services in this matter. Although himself responsible, as the official head of the Observatory, the practical work had chiefly been done by the Archdeacon. He further stated his agreement with the Archdeacon's conclusion that the longitude of the charts should be adhered to in giving time, although the result of the cable signals was to show it to be slightly in error—only four seconds. He did not agree with Mr. Thomson's doubt of the results on account of the personal equation not having been ascertained, as such error would have very minute effect on transit observations. But the question was the practical one of giving time to seamen, and that scarcely required such refinements. Mr. Thomson said he admitted that for all practical purposes the observations might be sufficient, but that in such matters he looked for the strictest scientific accuracy. For purely scientific purposes, the ascertainment of personal error was undoubtedly necessary. 4. “Notes on New Zealand Cetacea,” by Dr. Hector, C.M.G., C.M.Z.S. (Transactions, p. 477.) Archdeacon Stock, who had always before considered the sperm whale peculiar to the Southern Seas, actually saw one spouting in the Bay of Biscay. Mr. W. T. L. Travers referred to an interesting fact mentioned by the author as to certain Cetaceans traversing the ocean from north to south across the tropics. He had himself, some years ago, met with Banks' oar-fish in New Zealand; this form being met with also in English waters, in India, and in Africa. Dr. Newman said he could not agree with the view that whales could traverse the tropical seas. Dr. Buller said that the present discussion brought to his recollection a theory propounded by Dr. Günther, at one of the meetings of the Zoological Society, regarding the distribution of certain pelagic species, to the effect that they performed their migrations from one part of the globe to another, by diving to such depths in the ocean as would give a temperature suited to their nature. Dr. Hector said he quite believed that this was the true solution of the matter; and the results of the “Challenger” expedition had shown that sufficiently cold water was to be found at no great depth in the tropics to make it quite feasible. Of the fact that the species mentioned were identically the same on both sides of the equator there could be no doubt whatever. 5. “Notes on New Zealand Ichthyology,” by Dr. Hector, C.M.G., F.L.S. (Transactions, p. 465.) 6. “Notes on some ancient aboriginal Câches near Wanganui,” by H. C. Field. (Transactions, p. 220.) This paper was read by the President. Mr. Crawford remarked that the paper was not only well written, but well reasoned out, although in respect to the petrified wood having been brought from Australia, he differed from the author, there being plenty of it all over this island. He took exception also to Mr. Field's introduction of volcanic agency as a factor in the phenomena described by him, the nearest centre of volcanic action being Ruapehu, fully seventy miles off. Dr. Hector said he had listened to the paper with interest, but would like the author to give further details; for example, as to the size of the stones forming the remarkable circles described by him.

7. “On the Draining of Towns, and the Results of having Outfall Drains within Sydney Harbour,” communicated by W. R. E. Brown, Registrar-General. (Transactions, p. 260.) Mr. W. T. L. Travers said we were indebted to the author for bringing this subject forward. The water referred to as being supplied to the ships in Wellington, came from a stream at the back of the Terrace, and is not the same as that now used by the town. Mr. O'Neill did not think it fair to compare Sydney with Wellington as regards the sewage, the harbours were so different. The great drawback to Sydney was the bad water supply, narrow streets, and bad ventilation. Colonel Leckie drew attention to the evil effects of discharging the sewage into the harbours at Bermuda and Gibraltar. Mr. J. T. Thomson approved of the system advocated in Mr. Campbell's paper (vide ante, p. 29). The water-closet system was of modern date, and only experimental. In Dunedin, the pail system was adopted, with removal of the soil by steam barges, and the plan would, he thought, be the best for Wellington. Manufacturing towns should have a special system. Mr. Wallace considered that the drainage of Wellington must go to the sea, but the deposit should be collected in brick receivers which would hold the sediment, the latter to be removed without going into the harbour. This plan he illustrated on the black board. Mr. Campbell remarked that the paper and reports contained most valuable particulars of the difficulties occasioned in Sydney by adopting a bad system of sewage. If Sydney was situated on the sea-shore, there would still be a nuisance from the close proximity of the sewer. The City Engineer advocated the emptying, by pneumatic vans, of those cesspits which had still to be used, which was probably the best means that could be adopted. The reports appeared to show an inclination towards the separate system. The Melbourne pail-system did not appear to be a success under the present mode of management. The result would probably be different if the pails were numbered and a regular record kept of each, and one carter and one guard provided for each cart; also one inspector to every four or five carts, as at Rochdale, and bed-room slops not permitted to be thrown into the pails. Dr. Newman thought that, into whatever harbour sewage was discharged, it would pollute it and be dangerous. Mr. Wallace was quite wrong in his theory about the tanks. The most offensive part would not remain at the bottom. However great the scour, it must be taken a long way off. Mr. Crawford said he was quite prepared to take on his land all the manure of this kind for 1,000 years to come. Mr. Brown, in reply, quoted extracts from reports against Mr. Wallace's plan, bearing out what Dr. Newman had said against it. The following papers were taken as read:—