AN'I3 THEIR ESSENTIAL OILS. 25 



There was rather more pinene and less ester in E ' . verni- 

 cosa, but this may be due to difference in the time of year 

 and location. The only difference worthy of notice is the 

 larger amount of ester in the oil of E '. Muelleri. 



EUCALYPTUS PERRINIANA, R. T. B. e,t H. G. S. 

 BOTANY. 



ll.istaricaL The history of this species can perhaps be 

 better told by reproducing the following from the museum 

 collector's letter received from Mr. L. G. Irby when in the 

 field in search of the material for this investigation: 



" Mr. Ellis informed me that many years ago he dug 

 up some of these small trees, and planted them at his home 

 on the Dee. At the present time only one of them is still 

 alive, and it is about 18 inches in diameter, proving, there- 

 fore, that E . Perriniana attains some size. He states that 

 Perrin never saw the patch of trees in the bush, but that 

 he (Ellis) showed him the one he had growing at his house, 

 and that it was only this one tree that Perrin wrote about. 

 He told me this scrap of information, although I had not 

 mentioned the name of Perrin at all. Afterwards I told 

 him that Mueller had named this tree Perriniana after 

 Perrin, and the old gentleman was quite surprised, as 

 he appears to look upon this tree as his own find. I 

 mention this as it seems to prove that, thanks to Mr. Ellis, 

 I have come upon the original clump of trees from which 

 this species was first written up. Indeed, it would appear 

 that no more are known in Tasmania; at least, not 

 recorded." 



It was really first announced to science by Mr. C. S. 

 Perrin, F.L.S., Conservator of Forests, Victoria, before 

 the A.A.A.S. (1890, 557). Mr. Rodway (Proc. Roy. Soc. 

 Tas. 1893, p. 181) gives additional data concerning the 

 plant. 



Remarks. It appears that no other systematic descrip- 

 tion of this Eucalyptus has been published except that 

 given by us in " Eucalypts and their Essential Oils/' 

 although Rodway (Joe. cit.) gives the authorship to 

 Mueller. We certainly were under the impression that 

 Mueller had described it when writing our previous work, 

 but through the kindness of Professor Ewart we have 

 been enabled to read all the correspondence that passed 

 through the Melbourne Herbarium in connection with it, 

 and also to examine the original specimens of Perrin, and 

 find that such is not the case. 



