85 



4. The French botanist, Naudin, who had access both to Bonpland's original 

 specimens of E. diver sifolia and to the progeny therefrom, wrote two papers : — 



(a ) " Memoire sur les Eucalyptus introduits dans la region Mediterraneenne" [Ann. 

 des Sc. Nat. 6° Ser. Bot, t. xvi (No. 6), p. 413 (1883)]. 



(6) " Description et emploi des Eucalyptus introduits en Europe principalement en 

 France et en Algerie " (Antibes, 1891). 



(a) is quoted as 1st Mem., and (b) as 2nd Mem. 



Naudin' s remarks are valuable, not only because of his valuable contributions 

 to a knowledge of the genus, but also because he was in possession of the French traditions 

 as to E. diversifolia. Following is a translation of what he said: — 



" E. diversifolia Bonpl. Nav. et Malm., p. 35, tab. 13, DC. Prod, iii, 220. Species mistakenly identified 

 ■with E. viminalis by Bentharn. 



" A lofty tree (this is a slip ; it only grows to 12-15 metres, according to bis own showing — ( J.H.M.), 

 the older bark falling off in ragged pieces, leaving the trunk smooth. Leaves in the juvenile stage opposite 

 and sessile, oblong-elliptical; in the adolescent stage alternate, petiolate, lanceolate, slightly or not falcate, 

 coriaceous, rigid, shining. Umbels axillary, pedunculate, often 9-11 flowered. Flowers shortly pedicellate. 

 Operculum shortly conical. Fruit broadly turbinate, rather woody, flattened on the upper side. Capsule 

 the same length as the calyx-tube, four-celled at the most, and opening with the same number of apertures. 

 (The original of the above is in Latin.) It is one of his " biforme " species (i.e., where the differences between 

 the juvenile and adult leaves are much accentuated). 



He then gives an expanded translation of the above referred to Latin in French. He then goes on 

 to say, " This tree, that Mr. Bentham has confused with E. viminalis, from which it is very different, seems 

 to me one of the least variable of the species. I have always found it uniform in the different gardens of 

 Provence (Nice, Antibes, St. Raphael, Hyeres, Toulon), as well as the nursery at Hamma, near Algiers, where 

 it attains a height of 12-15 metres. It is certainly one of the first Eucalypts which has been introduced 

 into France, perhaps the first of all, since it was in cultivation at la Malmaison from the beginning of the 

 century, and it flourished when, iD 1813, Bonpland published his descriptions of the plants of this establish- 

 ment. The figure he gives of it also makes it easy to recognise. At the time the tree was also cultivated 

 in the garden of the Marine at Toulon, and according to a note from M. Robert, then director of this garden, 

 he had received it direct from la Malmaison. I owe the communication of this note to M. Chabaud, naval 

 botanist of the St. Mandrier Garden, near Toulon (I have a specimen from this garden — J.H.M.), and it 

 is this which has put me in the way of recognising the species. 



" I have no information as to the forestry value of this species. So far, it is simply an ornamental 

 garden-tree." (Naudin, 1st Mem., 413.) 



Naudin practically repeats the above, with the following addition : — 



" Following Mueller, E. diversifolia Bonpl. would be confounded with E. santalifolia (Eucalypto- 

 graphia). However, the species there described hardly agrees with the figure (it is really E. pachyloma, as 

 I have already stated (J.H.M.), nor with the description of this last work, where, among other differences, 

 E. santalifolia is indicated as a mere shrub. But the species of this genus are so variable that I would not 

 yet like to pronounce as to the identity or the non-identity of these two species." (2nd Mem., 50.) 



5. I attach a translation of what Dr. Diels and Pritzel said, for completeness 



sake, but it does not help us much. 



" Mueller thought it (E. pachyloma Benth.) to be identical with E. santalifolia. This opinion, however, 

 so far is hardly confirmed. The areas given by Mueller are widely separated, the South Australian localities 

 being more than 1,000 miles distant from the Western Australian ones. I have not seen the plants." 

 [Engler's Jahrb., xxxv., 442, 1905). 

 D 



