226 



He says, " Some woods may have different shades of colour, as oak, which is 

 either dark or light. This shading of colour in woods may be very marked, and caused 

 by variations of soil and rate of growth, more or less perfect formation of heartwood, 



&c After wood has been kept for some time its colour usually deepens, 



and many bright-coloured woods become greyish." 



Timbers vary in colour according as they are green, or seasoned or old. That 

 is why so many timbers are described by some pale colour as white, pink, or pale, and 

 subsequently as brownish, red, or dark. 



In my first classification of the Ironbarks of New South Wales, in a paper read 

 before the Sydney Architectural Association on 4th September, 1893, I speak of the 

 timber of E. paniculata as " very pale, pink when fresh," In my " Notes on the 

 Commercial Timbers of New South Wales " (Second Edition, 1904), I spoke of it (p. 7), 

 as " often pale-coloured, even grey." 



Every timber merchant knows that he has to grade his timbers of the same 

 kind according to weight, colour, grain, &c. I am not referring to different species, 

 but to grading within the same species. This is particularly the case in Northern 

 Europe and North America, with timber of say Pine and Oak. In Australia, as regards 

 our indigenous timbers, we have entered less into the refinements of grading, but even 

 in such reputedly definite timbers as Jarrah, Tallow Wood, the Stringybarks and even 

 the Ironbarks (now under discussion), the timber merchant recognises variations or 

 grades. I have a block of She-oak timber on my study table. When I first had it, 

 some years ago, it was fiery-red, almost loud; it is now an inoffensive reddish-brown 

 or brown. 



Speaking of E, paniculata timber at Part XIII, p. 104, 1 quote the late Augustus 

 Eudder as to its variation in colour. He spent a long life in E. paniculata country, 

 and was shrewd in regard to both botanical and timber differences. See also my remarks 

 on " vernacular names " at p. 105 of the same Part. 



Other Reputed Differences between E. paniculata and E. Fergusoni 



and E. Nanglei. 



Quoting Mr. Baker, p. 411, " . . . . it was found that the trees, in addition 

 to having distinct timbers, differed also in variation of fruit, leaves and bark." 



Mr. Baker does not publish a key to his species Fergusoni and Nanglei (in 

 comparison with E. paniculata), and therefore we have mainly to fall back on the 

 photographs of the fruits as shown in Plate XXI. My point is, elaborated at p. 227, 

 that the forms all run into each other. 



Page 419. E. Nanglei. There is a general absence of contrasted characters, 

 an exception being, under E. Nanglei, " the whole plant being coarser than E. paniculata 

 and the fruits are quite characteristic, the chief feature being the rim, which frequently 

 flattens in pressed specimens .... differs from its type E. paniculata in . . 

 shape of fruits .... In botanical sequence it may follow E. Fergusoni, although 

 its organs differ considerably from that species." 



