president's address. 745 



The first botanical paper to be met with in the Proceedings is 

 a popular account of the Flora of Northern Queensland, by Mr. 

 F. M. Bailey, which appeared in the second Volume (p. 276). 

 A popular paper "On the Ferns of Queensland," from the same 

 pen, appeared in the next Volume (p. 118). Another popular 

 paper on the introduced Plants of Queensland will be found at 

 p. 26 of the fourth Volume; and the first descriptive botanical 

 paper, also by Mr. Bailey, "On a new Species of Fern, Asplenium 

 Prenticei,^^ at p. 36 of the same Volume. In the same Volume 

 also the Rev. Tenison-Woods and Mr. Bailey write on the Bris- 

 bane Flora. In the fifth Volume the indefatigable Bailey has a 

 paper on the " Medicinal Plants of Queensland," and another on 

 two new Queensland Ferns. Tenison-Woods and Bailey write on 

 the Fungi of New South Wales and Queensland; and the latter 

 describes a new species of Nepenthes. In the fifth Volume also 

 Baron von Mueller makes his debut (p. 286) with Notes on the 

 Flora of Mt. Dromedary; and this is followed (at p. 288) by Rev. 

 Dr. WooUs' maiden paper ori the " Eucalypts of the County of 

 Cumberland." To the sixth Volume both Mr. O'Shanesy and 

 Rev. B. Scortechini were contributors, so that by this time, under 

 the influence of a completed Flora Australiensis, the ship of botany 

 might be said to be now fairly launched. It will be seen what 

 a prominent part Bailey took in the botanical work of our infant 

 Society. 



I knew the late Rev. Dr. Woolls well, and useful as some papers 

 read before this Society are, I always feel that they do not do full 

 justice to his botanical knowledge, on account of his great difii- 

 dence in expressing his opinions. He would freely and fully 

 place his stores of information at the disposal of others, but 

 rarely could he be persuaded to appear in print. He seldom, if 

 ever, published a new species, althougli to others (almost invari- 

 ably to Mueller), he would indicate what he deemed to be new and 

 would leave the credit of publication to others. Mr. E. Haviland 

 was another of tlie earl}'' botanical contributors to our Proceedings. 

 He is still alive, though feeble from great age, and, like Woolls, 

 he was very adverse to see his name in print. Though a good 

 40 



