Wellington Philosophical Society. 541 
This contrast might be carried much further, but my object is to show 
the relationship between the two floras rather than their dissimilarity. Before 
proceeding with this subject, however, it will be convenient to state two 
facts which it is desirable to keep in mind. The superficial area of New 
Zealand is rather less than 100,000 square miles; that of Australia, in- 
cluding Tasmania, is upwards of 3,000,000 square miles. No part of New 
Zealand extends north of the thirty-fourth parallel of latitude, while fully 
two-fifths of Australia are within the tropic of Capricorn. Further, it 
cannot be doubted that a much larger proportion of new species remains to 
be added to the flora of Australia than to that of New Zealand, and it is 
chiefly among the species yet to be discovered in this colony that we must 
expect to find further indications of an ancient connection between the two 
floras. 
Both assemblages of plants now under consideration have one broad 
feature in common. The great majority of species in each is endemic, and 
consists of plants that have originated within the geographical limits of 
either New Zealand or Australia, as the case may be; but notwithstanding 
this there is a direct relationship between them. Not only are many plants 
common to both, but others plentiful in one country are represented by 
closely-allied species in the other. 
The number of species known to be common to both countries is—Dico- 
tyledons, 143, belonging to 92 genera; Monocotyledons, 95, belonging to 60 
genera; Filicales, 87, under 80 genera. Of these 120 species are not known 
to occur elsewhere. ; 
If, however, we look at the total number of genera common to both 
countries, we shall see that the relationship is much closer than it appears 
to be from a simple consideration of the number of species common to both. 
Here we find :— 
Dicotyledons. E dons. Filicales. 
169 . 33 
Gen 
Bo that in addition to the 181 genera Red species common to both 
countries, there are 96 genera represented in each country by different 
Species. Leaving the Filicales out of consideration for the present, nearly 
five-sixths of the Phenogamic genera of New Zealand are common to both 
countries. I do not at present draw attention to those genera in one 
eountry which take the place of closely-allied genera in the other, but will 
simply state that all the natural orders represented in the New Zealand flora 
are also represented in Australia, with the exception of Coriariee and 
Chloranthacee. 
It would, however, as was long since pointed out by Sir Joseph Hooker, 
be wrong to infer from this that the flora of this colony is little more than 
an offshoot from that of Australia, since there is no other instance za iach T 
