70 



An official pamphlet, issued by the Tasmanian Railway Department, refers 

 to " Stringybark Gum, Euc. obllq/ia. Xo. 300, T.G.ll. Two planks 6 ft. 6 in. by 

 9 inches by 5 inches, Scottsdale Line." 



I believe this is the same as the following timber, sent to the Colonial and 

 Indian Exhibition of 188G :— 



" Stringy Gum." — This wood bears a strong resemblance in general appearance and texture to 

 stringybark (E. obliqua), but the grain is crossed diagonally with long spots of a lighter shade, which 

 should show a good figure if the wood could be polished. Stringy gum, however, is open to the same 

 objection as stringybark, but in a still more marked degree, for not only does the grain rise after the board 

 is planed, but, unless it is absolutely dry, fibres of the wood become detached from the surface which 

 renders this wood quite unfit for any but rough work. (Allen Ransome, in Kew Bnlletin, May, 18S0.) 



In Victoria also [e.g., Port Road, Gippsland, Howitt) the Gum-top Stringy- 

 bark runs into E. obliqua. 



At comparatively low elevations the leaves of the Gum-top Stringyljark arc 

 but little glaucous, and have but little aroma. Their affinity to E. obliqua is 

 undoubted. While, as a matter of classification, they may, i:)erhaps, be looked upon 

 as belonging to E. Hisdoni, var. elala, I cannot say that those botanists who look 

 upon them as belonging to E. obliqua are wrong. In fact I think they mu.st 

 be looked upon as a variety of E. obliqua. 



D. and E. E. regnans, ~E. v. M., and, therefore, since Mueller (wrongly, I 

 think) has merged this species in E. amygdalina, Labill., E. amygdalinu, also. 



" Sucker leaves (glaucous when fresh) from base of stem of typical E. 

 regnans, 120 feet high; bark fibrous, but i\ot thick, for about 40 feet. Mount 

 Wellington, 1,500 feet." (L. Rodway.) 



" Silver Top," Darlimiuda, S. Gippsland, Victoria, " Bark rough, resembling 

 that of stringybark ; limbs smooth and white, hence local name." (H. Deane). 



There is justification for looking upon these trees as forms of E. regnans. 



F. E. dives, Schauer. [See E. hcemasloma, Sm., E. Sieberiana, P. v. M.] 

 I have given reasons {Vict. Natwalist, July, 1901, p. 124; AusL Assoc, for Adv. 

 Science, Hobart, 1902) for looking upon certain Gum-top stringybai'ks as forms of 

 E. dives ; but while I now think that they may be considered to belong to E. 

 Hisdoni, var. elata, I think it is instructive to look upon them as forms of E. dives, 

 with which they have undoubted affinity. 



G. E. hcemasloma, Sm. — I believe Mr. T. Stephens first drew attention to a 

 " Gum-top stringybark," and Mueller called it a form of E. haniasloma. The name 

 is not now justifiable, and Mueller withdrew it as further information reached him; 

 but as the determination has been so frequently published, it is desirable to draw 

 attention to it now for completeness sake. In " Notes on a species of Eucalyptus 



