67 



DESCRIPTION. 



CXXX. E. Stuartiana F.v.M. 



As described in a modified manner by Mneller in his " Eucalyptographia," Part iv 



(1880). 



It may be described as follows : — 



A large, often scrambling tree, with soft, white (often superficially discoloured) box-like bark, rough 

 to the extremities of the branchlets, Bark thickish, often zigzagged or wrinkled, and reminding one of the 

 shorn back of a sheep. 



Timber pale-coloured (sometimes flesh coloured when fresh), soft, brittle, and lacking in durability. 



Juvenile leaves. — Glaucous, nearly orbicular, or with a blunt apex, sessile, stem-clasping. 

 Intramarginal vein well removed from the edge, lateral veins roughly pinnate. 



Mature leaves. — Lanceolate, equally green on both sides, petiolate (petiole often markedly twisted), 

 intramarginal vein well removed from the edge, lateral veins roughly pinnate. Leaves sometimes very 

 long, approximating those of E. globulus in size. 



Buds. — Four to seven in number on short pedicels on a common peduncle of about - 5 cm. The 

 operculum shortly rostrate and equal in length to the calyx-tube which abruptly tapers into the pedicel. 



Flowers. — The anthers open in parallel slits, and have a small gland at the back. The filament 

 is attached at about the middle and the anther is versatile. 



Fruits. — Nearly hemispherical, about - 7 cm. in diameter, with a well defined slightly domed rim, 

 the valves markedly protruding from the orifice. 



In honour of Charles Stuart (180,2-1877), an educated man, who collected 

 Tasmanian sea-weeds for Harvey, and miscellaneous plants extensively for Mueller 

 in Tasmania and New South Wales (chiefly in New England). Many species were 

 named after him. For details of his botanical work see my notes on Australian 

 Botanists — (a) General, (b) New South Wales in Jonrn. and Proc. Roy. Soc. 

 N.S. W., xlii, p. 124 (1908), and Tasmanian Botanists in Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasmania, 

 1909, p. 28. 



This is but one of many species in regard to which there has been much 

 confusion in the synonymy. It would perhaps be an advantage if the name of 

 E. Stuartiana F.v.M., could be blotted out from the list of Eucalypts, but such a 

 step would be impossible ; and the wisest course has for many years seemed to me to 

 restrict it to the widely diffused " Apple " of New South Wales, Northern Victoria, 

 and Southern Queensland. 



It seems an unnecessary addition to an ah'eady over- burdened synonymy to 

 describe the species under another name. 



Amongst those forms labelled " E. Stuartiana F.v.M." by Mueller, this is 

 the most widely diffused ; it was so named by Mueller more frequently than any 

 other form, and adoption of the name would involve a minimum of disturbance of 

 botanical nomenclature. 

 B 



