368 PROCEEDINGS OF SECTION D. 
date when the identity of L’Heritier’s species 
was placed beyond doubt. ; 
2. E. elatus, Hook. f., Herb. Kew. Gunn’s specimen 
1284 in Herb. Kew. bears the MS. name, in 
Hooker f.’s handwriting, “ Hucalyptus elatus, 
H. f.” “Trunk erect, branching at top only, 
140 feet high. 3000 ft. alt. Dee tier. Very 
large trees; many dead.” 
The fruits are not ripe, but thé plant is Z. 
obliqua, L’Her., as so noted in Herb Kew. 
Another of Gunn’s specimens (‘‘ Kangaroo 
Bottom, 9/25, 1840’’) also bears the provisional 
name “‘ Hucalyptus elatus, J. D. H.,” in Hook. 
f.’s handwriting. 
3. H. fissilis, F.v.M. (See p. 216, Official Record. 
Intercol. Exhib. Australia (Melb., 1866-7), and 
other documents). 
4. H. heterophylla, Migq., is described in Ned. 
Kruidk. Arch. iv. 141 (1856), briefly, as 
follows: —‘ 45, Hucalyptus heterophylla, Migq., 
n. sp.: foliis subopposits et oppositis, alternisve, 
longiuscule petiolatis, elliptico vel ovato-ob- 
longis, sursum attenuatis, basi aequali vel 
inequali acutis vel obtusis, coriaceis, 4-94 poll. 
lonpis, 14-3 latis, floribus:- 90.252) oe ee Van 
Diemen’s Land (Stuart, n. 2).” 
Bentham, while pointing out that it was 
‘described from barren leafy branches,’ says 
that it ‘“‘appears to be one of the forms assum- 
ed by the saplings, or by the adventitious shoots 
of #. obliqua” (B. FI. 111. 205). 
Mueller, however (‘‘Eucalyptographia,’ under 
E. globulus), thinks that it may be #. globulus. 
Stuart’s No. 2 is not at Kew. 
The matter is not of the first importance, but 
I am making an endeavour to trace every 
described species of Eucalyptus. 
5. Hucalyptus procera, Dehuh. 
“E. foliis late-ovatis longissimis obliquis 
coriaceis parallele venosis marginatisve sub- 
crenulatis utrinque glanduliferis apice unci- 
natis, petiolis muricatis coloratis, ramulis 
teretibus glanduliferis rubicundis. Cortice 
laevi aestivo tempore in squamas secedente.” 
Nov. Holl. (Dehnh. Cat. Pl. Hort. Camald. 
Ed. 2., p. 20). 
? 
