Muetier—Wotes on an Undescribed Acacia from New South Wales. 223 
corolla is usually five-lobed, not like that of 4. dongzfolia and its allies fourcleft ; but 
how far this note holds good, requires yet further to be ascertained. Already De 
Candolle, and later Hooker, seized on this characteristic, when briefly defining 4. 
cenerascens of Sieber, who may have possibly perceived other distinctions between 
that supposed species and A. glaucescens. Sprengel, who one year later than De 
Candolle promulgated A. czxerascens by a diagnosis too brief, lays also stress on the 
characteristic of grey-velutinous branchlets, which does not apply to A. Mazdenzz ; it 
is therefore unlikely that Mr. Maiden’s plant should be connected by intermediate 
forms with 4. cénerascens, which authentically was not gathered in fruit. Contrarily, 
Bentham seems to have been quite right in combining it with A. gZaucescens, of which 
Mr. A. R. Crawford says, that the phyllodes of young plants are roundish. A. 
leucadendron, reduced by Bentham to A. glaucescens, represents perhaps also the 
form cznerascens, as in Hooker’s Lond. Journ. I. 374, the spikes are called, probably 
by a mere writing error, semipollicares, instead of sesquipollicares (when fully 
developed) ; this can only be cleared up from Cunningham’s collections. 
Furthermore, it should be remarked, as pointed out by Mr. Maiden, that 4. 
glaucescens is in the lowlands of New South Wales a southern species, while 4. 
Mardenit is a northern, from regions not accessible to Sieber during his only seven 
months’ Australian collecting visit to Port Jackson and its vicinity from June, 1822, 
to Jan., 1823. Here it may be of further interest to state, that a letter from Sieber 
appeared in the Ratisbon bot. Zeitung “Flora” of 1824, at pp. 250-256 and following, 
in which communication he speaks of the marvellous forms of Australian Acacias, 
specimens of about 150 species being shown him there and then by Allan Cunningham 
(F. C. Dietrich in Eichler’s Jahrbuch, 1881, p. 287). But as yet the fruit of A. 
cinerascens remains unknown, to confirm absolutely the specific identity of that plant 
with A. glaucescens. The preponderance of 4- or 5-cleft corollas can best be 
ascertained by examining great masses of the flowers on living plants at their 
indigenous places. The localities, annotated under A. glaucescens in the Flora 
Australiensis, II. 406-407, for northern New South Wales and for Queensland, 
belong probably all to A. Mardeniz; indeed, the most northern station for A. 
glaucescens, with certainty represented in the Melbourne Herbarium, is on the 
eastern slopes of New England at the Apsley River (A. R. Crawford), therefore in a 
cool region ; while its southern known limit is at the Genoa on mountains (Biiuerlen). 
The very flexuous fruit of 4. Mardenit resembles that of A. amplexa, but the arillar 
funicles in that species are much like those of 4. glaucescens, therefore basal only to 
the seeds. 
A. Cunninghami comes very near to A. Maidenit, particularly also in the 
venulation of the phyllodes, though the main venules are more prominent ; but the 
branchlets are very angular and more robust, the phyllodes more inequilateral and 
