125 



The ti'ee has a glaucous cast of foliage like E. folyanthemos ; the surrounding trees 

 of E. herniphloia, F.v.M., var. microcarpa, Maiden, are glabrous. Known locally as 

 " Fuzzy Box," or " Bastard Box." with rough bark up to the branchlets. The fuzzi- 

 ness or woolliness of the bark is a useful diagnostic character in this species. The 

 timber is hard to cut,but more chippy and short grained (brittle) than E. Jiemiphloia. 

 It is locally estei^med as a durable timber and a valuable firewood. The bark and 

 timber appear to be in no way different from the coast or typical form. 



Merriwa (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman), with much Loranthus on it. On the 

 river flats and taluses of the ridges — a usual situation. 



Clarence Siding, Blue Mountains (J. L. Boorman). 



The above are western localities, and the Blue Mountains locality brings this 

 form much nearer Sydney than it was previously known to occur. 



Following are northern localities : — 



" A Box-tree. Bark not so woolly as on Lachlan River trees ; same red 

 twigs. About \ mile south of cemetery, on granite, 2,800 feet above sea-level, 

 Tingha " (E. H. Cambage, No. 993). 



Bolivia. — Bark persistent to smallest branches (H. Deane). With broadish 

 leaves. 



Wallangarra, abundant. Flowering in the broadish-leaved stage. With 

 pink filaments in some flowers (J.H.M. and J. L. Boorman). 



Acacia Creek, Macpherson Range (W. Dunn). Some specimens with 

 broadish leaves. 



The broadish leaved forms of var. conica, almost as broad as that of the 

 typical form, are especially common in northern localities. 



Queensland. 



Wilson's Peak, Macpherson Range, on the Queensland as well as the New 

 South Wales side of the border (W. Dunn and J.H.M.). 



Wallangarra, on the Queensland as well as the New South Wales side of the 

 border (J. L. Boorman and J.H.M.). 



Texas, with quite narrow leaves (J. L. Boorman). 



AFFINITIES. 



1. With E. polyanthemos, Schauer. 



That it is liable to be confused with this species is evident when it is borne 

 in mind that eminent botanists have confounded them. Following are some; points 

 in which they differ : — 



