’Canada balsam’, which, as Stewart (1806) noted, was found in ”small blisters on the outside of the bark”, was a well-known product of the fir. Captain Samuel Holland is the first to mention it in island records, saying that ”the Canadians He the French canadiens of Quebec province] hold it in great reputemg, but whether it was ever harvested and used on the island for such a purpose is difficult to determine. Stewart (1806) implies so when he says "[it] is used both internally and externally”, but Sutherland’s (1861) comment on the medicinal value of balsam and Bain's (1890) statement that it was used in ”microscopy and the arts" seem to be generalized statements on the substance rather than indicating

its harvest for such uses on the island.

Lewellin (1832) reported that fir (along with spruce) had been tried for hedging along field boundaries. He also noted that fir ”afforded shelter”, and the use of it for shelter around farm- houses in the later nineteenth century is evident in a description of the landscape by a visitor to the island”). The aesthetic appearance of the fir tree seems also to have been appreciated: Bain (1890) calls it ”an elegant, tapering tree”, while MacGregor (1828) comments on the contribution of the ”deep green of the fir” to the forest landscape, though it is possible that he is using the word in the sense of the ’fir tribe' and may thus be referring to all of the conifers.

Conclusion — Fir was not a particularly important tree either in the island’s pre-European settlement forest or on account of the uses to which it could be put. Though it was probably a minor element occurring in specific areas within the upland hardwood forest, it seems to have made a more important contribution to the forests of wetter lowland areas. Also, because it was able to colonize both abandoned farmland and areas that had been burned or cut over, it became more important as the nineteenth century progressed, such that by 1904 it could be described as one of the island’s most abundant tree species. In terms of usage, its main value in the early period seems to have been for fencing.

reports an actual occasion where “boughs of fir‘ were used for that purpose.

229 Holland 1765 (October).

23° Anon. 1877.

177

EASTERN HEMLOCK (Tsuga canadensis)

Identification and nomenclature — Though hemlock makes its first appearance in British records in 177423‘, thereafter it is only rarely reported in the eighteenth century: it may be that because of its general similarity to spruce and fir it was not distinguished from those species by early recorders — or even if recognized as a distinct species, it was taken to be a type of spruce or fir.232 All recorders record it simply as 'hemlock’ except MacGregor (1828)233, who says there were two ”descriptions” of the tree on the island, the red and the white — these, however, appear to be wood descriptions without even varietal status.234

General distribution and abundance — Hemlock is listed in twenty-two of the thirty—six potential tree lists (Table 1—4)235. Its absence from virtually all of the lists of the eighteenth century suggests — as noted above — that it may not have been distinguished from spruce and fir. However, from the time of John Cambridge in 1796, it is included in most lists, with some recorders noting it to be among the principal trees of the island’s forests.236 It also has a lowish report rate in the tree tally (Table 1-1) receiving twenty-three mentions.

Specific areas — (See Figure 1-4). Selkirk (1803) noted that hemlock was "prevalent” on what he called the "East branch of Pinette River"237, as well

23‘ Patterson 1774. It had been recorded earlier by several

French period recorders (see Sobey 2002, pp. 130-31). 232 In fact botanists only placed it in a separate genus in 1855, classifying it previously with the pines and later with the firs (Elwes & Henry 1910), which partly explains why some island recorders (Table 1-4) recorded it as “hemlock pine', ‘hemlock fir' or ‘hemlock spruce‘, this last still being its standard name in Great Britain (e.g. Press & Hosking 1992).

233 And Bouchette (1832), who cites MacGregor as one of his sources.

23" I note that Lewis (1914) (p, 20) commented that hemlock trees “growing on well—drained soils have a much superior lumber and are often called ‘white hemlock' though this is not a distinct species". However, Perley (1847) in his ‘Forest Trees of New Brunswick’ makes no mention of this distinction, nor is it mentioned in Si/vics of North America (Godman & Lancaster 1990).

235 The thirty—seventh list, that of [Bain] (1882), did not include the conifer trees.

23" [Hill] 1819, MacGregor1832, Monro 1855. 237 The term "East branch of Pinette River" presents a problem: the three branches of the Pinette River are currently named the ‘North‘, ‘Middle' and ‘South‘. The context of Selkirk's diary entry implies that either the North or Middle Branch is meant. I opt for the North Branch as it has a fork at the point near where Selkirk would have crossed the river by canoe, at the end of the portage across Point Prim, with the main part of the river extending well to