80 



Then Bentham describes it in B. Fl. iii, 223, giving E. brevifolia F.v.M., and E. 

 microiheca F.v.M., as synonyms. In the combined description and list of localities, 

 Bentham has included E. rostrata F.v.M., E. microtheca F.v.M., and perhaps E. rudis 

 Endl. (at least as regards Drummond's 4th Collection No. 73). 



Mueller in " Eucalyptographia " quotes E. brachypoda as a synonym of three 

 species. 



(a) Under E. microtheca F.v.M. he synonymises " E. brachypoda Benth. B.F1. 

 iii, 223 (partly)." Bentham himself attributes the species to Turczaninow. 



(b) Under E. rudis Endl. he has " E. brachypoda Turcz." 



(c) Under E. rostrata Schlecht. he has " E. brachypoda Turcz. not of Bentham." 

 Mueller expands his remarks under E. microtheca, and I have quoted them at 



Vol. ii, p. 51 of this work. At ii, 51, of the present work I have pointed out that Bentham 

 had named two species under E. brachypoda. 



Since the above was written, I have received from Dr. A. B. Rendle, Keeper of 

 Botany, British Museum, London, another specimen of Drummond's 4th Collection, 

 No. 73. At ii, 51, I stated that I had seen a specimen of Drummond's 73 which had 

 been named E. rudis by Mueller, and that I agreed with the determination. The 

 British Museum specimen is named " E. rostrata var.," an error which is quite pardonable. 

 The specimens are not good, consisting of flower-bearing twigs with a few buds. These 

 buds are small and short, and it is quite easy to confuse them with buds of E. rostrata, 

 namely those ovoid, slightly pointed buds which are often seen in E. rostrata. One 

 can, without difficulty, obtain in the Perth district specimens which match the not 

 perfectly satisfactory ones of Drummond's iv, 73, and which connect with the type. 

 I reiterate that Drummond's specimen is E. rudis. Bentham made a mistake in making 

 E. brachypoda Turcz. (founded on Drummond's specimen) synonymous with E. 

 microtheca F.v.M., which he was led into by the pale-green foliage of Drummond's 

 specimen. 



2. With E. Campaspe S. le M. Moore. 



In Part xvi, p. 204, I drew attention to the fact that Mr. Moore suggested the 

 affinity of his species to E. rudis; I will now be convenient to compare the figures of 

 of E. rudis with those of E. Campaspe in Plate 71. 



E. Campaspe is a somewhat scrambling, intensely glaucous, dry-country species ; 

 in all these points different to E. rudis. The timber of E. Campaspe is red and the tree 

 generally resembles E. salmonophloia. 



The opercula in E. rudis are usually conoid and rarely ovoid, and never hemis- 

 pherical as in E. Campaspe, whose buds do not have a marked commissural line. The 

 anthers possess reasonable similarity except that the filaments are versatile in E. rudis. 

 The fruits of E. rudis have terete, usually long peduncles and pedicels, while those of 

 E. Campaspe are much shorter and the peduncles broad. The fruits of E. rudis have 

 the calyx-tube more sunk; they are urceolate when ripe, those of E. Campaspe are 

 hemispherical. 



