204 



McDonald, near Cowra, he sent twigs tied together with fruits varying in size from as 

 small as ever seen in the figures of E. WooUsiana to as large as those seen in the variety 

 of E. hemijMoia. The little brmdle bore the label, " These three twigs are from the 

 same branch." 



The differences between E. WooUsiana may be ascertained (if possible) by 

 comparison of the figures, figs. 26, 2c, Plate 194, of the specimens attributed by Mr. 

 Baker to E. WooUsiana, and figs. 7-17, Plate .50, Part XI, of E. hetniphloia var. 

 microcarpa. In addition, we must take cognisance of material distributed by Mr. Baker 

 as co-types of his E. WooUsiana. 



Speaking generally, it may be said that they gradually run into each other, 

 and that there are times when it is difficult to separate -them on herbarixmi material, 

 especially if it be incomplete. The leaf characters do not appear to offer sufficient 

 evidence to always discriminate between them, and the buds and fruits are subject to 

 variation, both in shape and size, as already indicated. The suckers appear to be the 

 strongest characters by which they can be separated, but everything depends on what 

 we know as E. WooUsiana. 



