20 



as regards narrow-leaved forms, but as regards those that are broad-leaved. The 

 leaves of E. populifolia have usually a wavy margin, and are usually, perhaps 

 always, shiny, unless they have been collected wet. The venation of E. populifolia 

 is usually more prominent. The timber and bark of the two trees are often a good 

 deal alike. The fruit of E. j)opul/folia is quite small, and is not constricted at the 

 orifice as in E. hemiphloia and its forms. 



Var. albens, F.v.M. 



SYNONYMS. 



1. E. albens, Miq. 



2. E. pjalleits, Miq., non DC. 

 This is Mueller's statement : — 



The name of E, albens only arose from a misprint of E. pallenit, and was first promulgated without 

 any diagnosis, and the specific designation is apt to mislead, as the whitish hue, significant of E. albeim, 

 and for which it is called " White Box tree," occurs only in a particular .variety, chiefly of the western 

 interior (probably South Australia is referred to. — .J.H.M.) where even this characteristic is often not moie 

 remarkable than in several other congeners. — (Mueller in " Eucalyptographia," under E. hemiphloia.) 



Following is Miquel's statement : — 



35. Eucali/pfus albens, D.C. Prodr. I.e. 219, n. .30. E. dealhata, A. Cunning, mss. Schauer in Walp. 

 Rep. ii. p. 924 (?)'. 



Booker (Broken, -J.H.M.) river (F. Miill.). "Box tree colonorum. A pago Clairvillage ad m. 

 Remarkable, arbor .50-60 pedalis coma squarrosa, sylvas constituens (F. Miill.)." — (Miquel, in Ned. Kruidk. 

 Arch, iv, 138 (1856). 



Following is one of the specimens seen by Miquel : — 



"35. Euc. dealbata, A.C. Mt. Remarkable P. M. in Herb. Bonder." This 

 was changed to E. albens, DC, by Miquel. This specimen is in the Melbourne 

 Herbarium, and is E. hemiphloia, var. albens. 



Specimens labelled " E. pollens, DC. Broken River," in Mueller's hand- 

 writing in Herb. Kew, are E. hemiphloia, var. albens. These specimens are evidently 

 the co-types of those referred to by Miquel above. 



Let us now turn to E. pallens, DC. Prod, iii, 219. 



Miquel calls his plant E. albenn, quoting the above reference, and also 

 De CandoUe's sequence number (30) of the species. So that there is no doubt as 

 to the plant referred to. But there is no E. albens, in the Prodromus, the plant 

 being E. pallens, DC, and the type Sieber's Pis. Exs. No. 606. I have seen 

 specimens of Sieber's plant (I indeed have small pieces), and an excellent photograph 

 of the Prodromus type is, thi-ough the kindness of M. Casimir De Candolle, before 

 me as I write. 



I have figured it at Plate 7, Part II of this work, and have also described it 

 at page 57 of the same Part. I have there referred it to E. obliqua, L'Herit., which 

 is probably as nearly as ever we shall get (from the material available). In my 

 view, it is not a form of E. hemiphloia, F.v.M. 



