11 



XXVIII. E. uirgata Sieb. 



In Part XXXIX, p. 283. I have given a resume of the facts concerning the 

 identification of E. virgata Sieb., which makes the position perfectly clear. We have 

 had specimens of the type of E. Sieberiana, distributed by Mueller himself for very 

 manv years, besides which, correspondence with him has made it clear (if any doubt 

 existed, of which I am not aware) as to what he meant. As regards Sieber's type of 

 E. virgata, specimens have been in existence in herbaria for a century ; they consist of 

 leafs* twigs bearing buds. It was therefore obvious that it would be only a matter of 

 time when these specimens would be fully interpreted. I have explained my successful 

 labours in the identification of the type, which are available for everyone to check. 



In " Research on the Eucalypts," Ed. II, p. 310 (1920) Baker and Smith give a 

 figure of two fruits of an imaginary E. virgata, with the localities Springwood, Lawson 

 and Mount Victoria, all in the Blue Mountains, New South Wales; also Tasmania, in 

 which the species does not occur. 



Then follow the ad captandum arguments which in critical matters of taxonomy 

 we are not unaccustomed to get from Mr. Baker's pen. At p. 310 he says : — " Our 

 (Mr. Smith's and his own, but Mr. Smith is a chemist) action in regard to this species 

 will no doubt be thought to be arbitrary, but we, on our part think that Oldfield, 

 Woolls. Mueller and others, when dealing with type herbarium specimens, were in error 

 in supposing that Sieber's specimens and specific name belonged to the " Mountain 

 Ash " (E. Sieberiana). Sieber must have collected from a ' Mallee ' when he bestowed 

 the name E. virgata on his species." And so on. Mr. Baker has not fully figured 

 E. virgata. and insists on not knowing what that species is. He therefore is incapable 

 of understanding the position of the botanists (three named, " others " unnamed) he 

 has quoted. I am content to leave it at that. 



