84 KOTE ON A SPECIES OF EUCALYPTUS NEW TO TASMANIA. 



it will be desirable for oil distillers not to fell the trees, but 

 to lop the branches only. 



A. De Candolle, in his Prodromus, iii., 218, described a 

 plant under the name of Eucalyptus pilularis, ISmith, which 

 is not that species. The plant must be referred to as E. 

 pilularis, A. DC, and following is a translation of his 

 description : — 



" Operculum conical, with a rather shorter calyx tube, the 

 peduncles very short and subangular, flowers 6 or 7 in the 

 head, leaves linear-lanceolate acuminate, with the veins con- 

 fluent at the tops into an intramarginal one. New Holland, 

 Sieber, plant exs. nov. boll. No. 474. I doubt whether this 

 fepecimen of Sieber's that I have described is Smith's species 

 or not ? Is Sprengel's species different by reason of its 

 corymbose inflorescence ? Our flower-buds, the size of a grain 

 of millet, peduncles 2 or 3 lines, nearly one half shorter than 

 the petioles. Leaves 3 inches long and 5 lines broad." 



It will be thus seen that the plant is Sieber's No. 474, an 

 original specimen of which I have been able to examine from 

 two sources (a) The Berlin Herbarium ; (6) The Barbey- 

 Boissier Herbarium at Geneva. The first S23ecimen is in 

 hud only, and the sec' nd is in bud and fruit. It turns out 

 to be E. Macarthiiri, Deane and Maiden, and thus the 

 identity of a puzzling plant has been set at rest. Sieber's 

 No. 474 is in Bentham's Flora Australiensis, iii., 240, referred 

 to E. viminalis, Labill : which is a mistake. 



This erroneous reference to E viminalis reminds, me to 

 warn collectors that some small fruited multiflowered forms 

 of E. Gunnii [e.g., vars : acervula, maculosa, and 2)erhaps 

 ruhida) may, in ihe absence of notes on the bark and suckers, 

 be referred to E. Macarthuri. 



