214> 



Folia supra modum inflcxibilia, valde polymorpha. Nam praotcr basalc quoddam, monstrositatc 

 forte, breve, transverse ovatum, in pcdunculum angustatum, infima oj 2' 4" \g., <J 1' It., sequentia 3' 

 Ig., r It., idcoqiic oblonga, suporiora, in caulc 2' 6" Ig., 8" It., in ramo infcrius oblongo-lanceolatum, supcrius 

 oblongo-ovatum obtusam, et?. {Verz. P/l. Nachtr., ii, Hi.) 



The description in DC. Prod, iii, 221, is: — 



Foliis rigidis duris, infimis scssilibus oppositis ovatis subcordatis obtusis, supcrioribus petiolatis, 

 s^;arsis lanccolatis acutis subapiculatis, caulc ramisque tcrctibuj. In Nova-HoUandia. Flores fructusque 

 iji. Ai eaiim a3 E. divirsifolia. 



Mueller (" Eucalyptographia " under E. pulverulenta) says: — " E. rigida of Count 

 Hoffmannsegg's V erzeichniss der Pflanzen-KuUuren, 114 (1826), is probably referable 

 to E. fidverulentay This is but a surmise, and there are no specimens in the Melbourne 

 Herbarium to back up such an opinion. The word " rigidis " does not specially apply 

 t^ E. pidverulenta, while the words " sessilibus oppositis ovatis subcordatis obtusis " 

 apply to that and other species with more or less correctness. 



There are specimens in Herb. Vindob. bearing the following label: — "Eucalyptus 

 rifjida, Hoflmannsegg, Nov. HoU. Ferd. Bauer, Hb. Bauer," which are identical with 

 Brown's South Head road plant, which again is identical with Sieber's No. 473 {E. 

 rigida, Sieb.) = E. obtusiflora, DC. 



E. rigida, Sieb., PL Exs. (Sieber's No. 473), from Port Jackson, is E. obtusiflora, 

 DC, according to Bentham (B.Fl. iii, 205). I have specimens of the type, and concur. 



"To E. itricta belongs furtbermorc E. ri'jida of Sieber's eollcctions No. 473, although unite 1 by 

 Bentham with E. ohtiisi flora, but the latter, according to leaves from the original specimen kept at Geneva 

 and forwarded to me by M. Alphonse do CandoUe, proves it completely distinct from E. rijiia." (Mueller, 

 in Eacahjptojraphia under E. stdlulata.) 



I have already stated that I have specimen^ of Sieber's No. 473 (with the original 

 labels still adherent), which is the plant referred to by De Candolle in the Prodromus, 

 and it is a common Sydney plant known to every Sydney botanist. 



Sieber's No. 473 {E. rigida, Sieb.) is the plant we have recognised for many years 

 as E. obtusiflora, DC, and I venture to say that the drawing in M^m. Myrt., PI. 10 

 {E. obtusiflora, DC), is a good drawing. 



Mueller also labelled stricta var. angustifolia, E. rigida. This is E. apiculata, 

 Baker and Smith, and is a different plant. I think, therefore. Brown's name must be 

 dropped. To what extent he circulated it in herbaria I do not know. 



Hoffmannsegg's name must be abandoned because of its uncertainty, while 

 Sieber's name rigida can only claun the date 1828, the year of publication of DC Prod. iii. 



