LIBOCEDRUS TETRAGONA AND MACROLEPIS 185 
is attributed a fragrant odour. Our own verdict’ of 
it would be that while it has a flavour of fragrance, 
that flavour is of a very low standard of power. 
From the Chilensis the Libocedrus Decurrens can be 
told by the absence of white stomata and glands. 
The Tetragona and Macrolepis can be told by their 
octagonal, not flat, branchlets. The Tetragona has 
often been confused with the Fitzroya Patagonica, 
and we experience little wonder. While no one unread 
in tree-lore, and unversed in the ways and reasonings 
of the deeper-minded botanists, would on sight ever 
associate a L. Tetragona with a L. Decurrens, they 
certainly could, without straining a point, easily 
confuse the Tetragona and Fitzroya, notwithstanding 
the fact of their difference of fruit and leaf. The 
leaves of the L. Tetragona are in opposite pairs and 
stick away out from the adnate base. In the concave 
or upper side they show thick splotches of white 
stomata and their apex narrows to a blunt point, 
while the leaves of Fitzroya Patagonica are in whorls 
of three and show white stomata on both sides of the 
leaf. 
The Libocedri rank up generically alongside of the 
Thuyas and under the wide, outstretched family wing 
of the Cupressinez. Possessed of many and various 
vagaries in form and character, they cannot be an 
easy species to precisely locate in any family-tree 
sense. We must search Kew’s lists, and there seek 
the information we desire. And this is what we learn 
of them from those unquestioned sources: That 
they are of most undoubted Cupressinez persuasion ; 
they they are to be found in congregation with a 
sub-tribal sect, entitled Thuyine, a sect that includes 
such divergencies as Cypresses, Fitzroyas, Thuyas, 
and Biotas ; and that there among them, but seated 
alone, they occupy a pew to themselves in nearest 
proximity to the latter mentioned. 
