475 

 c. Use of the term " Bastard." 



The inelegant word " bastard " is applied by Australians to timbers, and especially 

 to Eucalyptus, to an extent equalled in no other part of the world, and it is therefore 

 idle to ignore it. It must be borne in mind that a civilised race has only come into 

 contact with these trees during recent times, and that the plants are different from those 

 of any other country. With difficulty the first workers amongst them gave names to 

 certain trees or groups of trees, such as Ironbark, Box, Blackbutt, Blue Gum, Red Gum, 

 and constituted these as types in their own amateur way. at all events, over more or less 

 limited areas. Then, as a man's experience widened, it dawned upon him that certain 

 trees or timbers did not conform to the standards he had set up. His nomenclature 

 had been used up, and yet he wished to indicate resemblance to his prototypes, and so 

 some ingenious person first thought of the prefix " Bastard," and it has stuck to Australian 

 trees with remarkable pertinacity. Originally there was no idea of cross-pollination, 

 though the use of the term in the mouth of the intelligent bushman may, in some cases; 

 afford a suggestion to the botanist. As a rule, the term merely means a difference from 

 an accepted standard, however arrived at, and this difference may be brought about by 

 environment, as well as by pollination. 



d. Use of Botanical names for Trade purposes. 



The use of botanical names for trade purposes is another aspect of the nomenclature 

 question, and I offer notes on the subject I published in Journ. Roy. Soc, N.S.W., LI, 465 

 (1917). 



If this principle be not very judiciously applied, instead of good resulting, the 

 divorce between the Eucalyptus nomenclature of botanists and that of commercial 

 men will be widened. In the case of a species name such as E. globulus, and a very 

 large number, indeed the vast majority of species, there are no differences of opinion 

 as to validity ; in other words, the scientific name can be used for timber or oil or any 

 other branch of commercial nomenclature with perfect safety. But the use of a name 

 which has not one, but many synonyms, is on a different footing, and its use for trade 

 purposes leads to the very confusion we all desire to avoid. A firm receives this name 

 in perfectly good faith, indeed it may not have the knowledge on which to form an 

 independent opinion ; oil is supplied under that name to its numerous customers. The 

 name becomes involved in trade transactions, and, having once adopted it, a firm naturally 

 becomes unwilling to withdraw it. In other words, a non-botanist takes botanical 

 side's, and he is actuated by one of the strongest of human motives, pecuniary interest, 

 and there is no doubt that, money being at stake, the commercial name will be closely 

 adhered to, to an extent measured by the demand for the oil, irrespective of any evidence 

 the dissentient botanist may adduce. This unfortunate state of affairs, which may 

 obstruct endeavours to arrive at a settled nomenclature, is always liable to take place 

 in the case of acceptance of any botanical name for trade purposes before it has been 

 thoroughly tested. In other words, we shall probably find it necessary, in future, to 

 employ two lists, one the stereotyped list that the stability of trade requires, and a 



