BY J. H. MAIDEN, I.S.O., F.E.S. 89 



In a few cases it has been possible to demarcate 

 narrow and broad-lea,v6d forms, placing them under 

 different species, but, so far as I can see, the leaves of 

 varying width in E . viniinalis form a quite uninterrupted 

 series. 



It is testimony to the sound judgment of the late M. 

 Naudin of the Villa Thuret, Antibes, in the south of 

 France, that, he detected it as something different from 

 E. viminalis, and only last year M. Tiabut described it 

 as new, under the name E. anti'politensis, and I append 

 a translation of his description. This is not the firet 

 occasion I have had the pleasure of drawing attention to 

 the excellent Eucalyptus work of these French botanists. 



''At tlie Villa Thuret at Antibes where there is a 

 collection of Eucalypts made by Naudin, I have especially 

 observed a veiy fine subject worthy of propagation. Nau- 

 din had provisionally labelled it E. viminalis var. longi- 

 fulia. The examination of the organs of reproduction as 

 of vegetation leave no doubt as to the parentage of this 

 form with E. [iJobulus. I propose to call it the Antibes 

 Eucalyptus. 



"E . ant,i'politensis, n. sp. (Plate xv. his). 

 "A tall tree, trun'k covered with fissured bark; 

 branches smooth by reason of the falling of the old bark ; 

 young leaves sessile, alternate, opposite, often in threes on 

 the same branch, broad and obtuse at the base of the 

 branch, then oval, glaucescent with the odour of E. glnhu- 

 lus; adult leaves thick, long-lanceolate, falciform, dark 

 green, dotted with large essential oil dots, umbels axillary 

 v/ith three flowers and short peduncle, buds sessile, verru- 

 cosa, hoary, calyx-tube ang-ular, operculum slightly longer 

 than the calyx-tube, hemispherical, mucronate, fruit from 

 12 mm. in diameter, with 3-4 valves not erect or very 

 slightly so; fertile seeds black, angular, without appen- 

 dagesi. Villa Thui-et, Antibes. 



"This Eucalyptus was. shown by Naudin very probably 

 as E. viminalis; he called it var. longifolia. 



"At first sight it is distinguished from E. viminalis by 

 its habit, its stem, its foliage reminding one of E . globiclus. 

 The buds and the fruits are much larger than those of 

 E. viminalis and strongly resemble those of E. globulus; 

 the fruits are much smaller than in this species, always in 

 threes; they are slightly verrucose, and show a slightly 

 different mode of dehiscence. The young leaves resemble 

 those oi E. glohulus and have the same odour, but they are 

 distinguished from it, however, in not being stem-clasp- 



