G6 



LXX. E. coneolor Schauer. 



The Type. The coneolor confusion. 



The type of this species comes from limestone hills near Fremantle, Western Australia, 

 as stated at p. 153, Part XIV of this work. A good deal of confusion has gathered 

 around it, partly because the incomplete material available could not be interpreted 

 at the time. 



Bentham (B.F1. iii, 249) quotes, in addition to the type, only specimens which 

 come from the south coast, hundreds of miles from the type locality. 



In Proc. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., xlvii, 231 (1913), I have drawn attention to two 

 specimens of the type lent to me by Dr. Fischer von Waldheim, then of the St. Peters- 

 burg Herbarium. Careful drawings were made of the specimens before returning them, 

 but one was in leaf only and the other was in flower, but without opercula. With 

 additional experience gained since then, and comparison of all material obtained from 

 the Fremantle district (including Claremont), I find that figures 7 a-d, Plate 63, are 

 practically identical with the type of E. coneolor. 



Fremantle material has, by Bentham, local botanists and myself, been included 

 in three species in all, viz., E. decipiens, uncinata, and falcat 'a. Following are references 

 which will help to elucidate this : — 



1. Under E. decipiens Endl. See Part XIV, last paragraph of p. 151, also Plate 

 63, figs. 7 a-d. Near Claremont Asylum, Perth, " practically a type locality of E. 

 coneolor.'''' In other words, I figured practically a typical specimen of E. coneolor as 

 E. decipiens. 



Mr. W. V. Fitzgerald, a well-informed Western Australian botanist, wrote, 

 " E. decipiens Endl. The Fremantle form consists of small thickets of erect shrubs, 

 8-12 feet high, growing on tertiary limestone." 



Bentham (B.F1. iii) kept E. decipiens and E. coneolor very far apart in his 

 classification. Both under E. decipiens (p. 218) and under E. coneolor (p. 247) he 

 recognises shrubby and tree forms, but although he gives a far larger ultimate size to 

 the former, he, speaking of the latter, says, " larger and more rigid (than E. decipiens) 

 in all its parts." To what extent the shrubby and tree forms are to be divided amongst 

 E. decipiens and E. coneolor begs the question as to whether the two species are really 

 different. 



In Proc. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., xlvii, 231 (1913) I express the opinion that 

 E. decipiens and E. coneolor are not specifically different, in which case E. decipiens, 

 being the older name, would stand. In view of the fact that inquiry is still 



