6 



confused with the above tree. I have often been surprised at the similarity. The 

 timbers are also a good deal alike, but E. cinerea has a soft fibrous bark, while that 

 of E. Gunnii var. rubida has a smooth one. 



In the Abstract of Proceeding, Linn. Soc. N.S.W., 29th July, 1391, the 

 Rev. Dr. Woolls exhibited some manna as from " E. pnlvei'ulenta " (cinerea was 

 intended) at Buckley's Crossing, which really came from E. Gunnii var. rubida. 



4. With E. Stuartiana F.v.M (tertia), the form I have adopted as E. 



Stuartiana F.v.M. I am now making a comparison with E. cinerea var. 



nova-anglica. (See below.) 

 Where the two forms occur together the latter goes by the name of Black 

 Peppermint and the former White Peppermint or Apple. The former has a white 

 zigzag or wrinkled bark, thicker and much paler in colour than that of the Black 

 Peppermint. E. Stuartiana has thickish, fleshy leaves, largish fruits (in compari- 

 son), and of a diffei*cnt shape to those of var. nova-anglica. The foliage of E. 

 Stuartiana is non-glaucous, except when young. Its buds are glabrous and of a 

 different shape to those of var. nova-anglica. Its leaves possess a less odour of 

 peppermint, and are often eaten by cattle. 



5. With E. cordata Labill. 



E. pvilverulenia (cinerea) has the branchlets generally more slender and not acute-angular, the 

 leaves not crenulated, but dotted with roundish almost uniform oil-pores, the flowers generally smaller, 

 the tube of the flowering calyx downward obconically attenuated, while the lid is less depressed, the fruit 

 is smaller, more top-shaped, and has a comparatively broader rim ; the convergent free part of the valves 

 emanates almost at a level with the calyx edge and arises not distinctly beneath the rim. The furrow 

 between the discal lining and the calyx-tube is running just beneath the edge of the fruit, not forming a 

 faint vertical channel around the rim. (Eucalyptographia, under E. cordata.) 



Nevertheless, it is not always easy to separate E. cinerea from E. cordata on 

 herbarium specimens alone. I have not seen E. cordata with flowers in more than 

 threes ; in E. cinerea this is not uncommon. 



Compare Plate 84 (E. cordata) with Plate 89 (E. cinerea). In the typical 

 forms of both species the flowers are in threes, but they are larger in E. cordata, 

 and the fruits of E. cinerea arc domed. The anthers are not very dissimilar and 

 there is a good deal of resemblance in the leaves. 



The leaves are usually thinner than those of E. cordata, but this is a 

 character which must be employed with caution. 



The bark of E. cinerea is always fibrous, partaking more or less of a Stringy- 

 bark character, that of E. cordata is smooth or ribbony. 



0. With E. Risdoni Hook. f. 



Compare figure 1 of Plate 90 (E. cinerea, var. mutlijlora) with figure 1 of 

 Plate 32 (E. Risdoni). There is a good deal of resemblance between the two 

 species, both have stem-clasping and lanceolate leaved forms. But the anthers are 

 different, the opercula are hemispherical in E. Risdoni, the fruits thin rimmed and 

 not domed in the same species, while E. Risdoni is smooth barked, 



