Systematic Classification here adopted. 



When this research was firsl commenced u was intended to follow the usual 

 morphological systematic classification oi previou botanists; but, as the work 

 progressed, i1 was found that nothing definite could be arrived at if sui h a i ourse 

 were followed. 



l'.\ working on morphological grounds alone, it was found that manj 

 the so ■ ailed individual species possessed different hark--, timbers, oils, dyes, &c. 

 a -laic- of things which quite differed from our definition of a species. Such an 

 artificial system (as this research appeared to prove it) had to be discarded, and 

 what is, apparently, a more real or natural system of classification had to ln- 

 adoptcd, viz., founding a species, nol on morphological characters oi dried 

 ma terial alone, bul on 



i. A field knowledge of the trees ; 



2. The nature and character of their barks; 



3. I he nature and character of their timbers; 



4. Morphology of their fruits, leaves, buds, &c. ; 



5. Chemical properties and physical characters of the oils, dyes, kinos, &c, 



and the utilisation of any oilier evidence, such as histology, physiology, 

 &c, thai might a— i^t in establishing differences or affinities oi species. 



Our experience, extending now over a period oi thirty years, shows that 

 a species founded on the above system as laid down in our first edition is found 

 after these years, to 1 e practically constant in specific characters, however great 

 the range of distribution may be. and many evidences of this fact will be 

 noticed throughout the work. In the ver\ few exceptions to this rule, reasons 

 for the divergence seem to lie clear. 



Necessarily a classification o! species on such a broad basis has not 

 always led us to coincide with the opinions and decisions of previous, as well as 

 contemporaneous, botanical workers on the genus. Our experience verifies the 

 remarks oi the late Dr. Woolls, who states . 



' Man) ot the trees which differ very widelj in the texture of their bark 

 and the specific gravity of their wood, and to all intents and purposes are 

 perfectly distinct from each other, yet agree very nearly with ordinary 

 eh. 11 ai ters by which species are regulated, so that a urn 1 iption, especially 



from dried specimens, may be applied to half -a-dozen different kinds of " Cum." 

 Indeed, this has frequenthj been the case, and even amongst men of scientific 

 attainments, as might be easily shown by referring to the various works which 

 have been written on the subject." {1 lora 0) Aust., p. 213.) 



I'., the method of classification here advocated and adopted, no such 

 1 1 infusion ot trees is possible. 



This research doe- no1 in the lea our the uniting ot species, and 



several oi those that have been synonymised in the past are here restored to 

 their original specifii rank. It was found thai the old morphological classification 

 untenable in particulai cases, so also was it recognised thai descriptions and 

 original material oi some species were made to include, under the one name, trees 

 which were evidently distinct from each other, and these are separated in 

 this work: lor instance, under E . Stuartiana , were included in descriptions and 



