BY HENRY DEANE AND J. H. MAIDEN. 
543 
A paper by J. H. Maiden and R. T. Baker in Proc. Linn. Soc. 
N.S.W. [2], viii., 312, may be here referred to, as the affinity of 
E. propinqua to E. saligna is there shown. E. prpinqua is, in 
that paper, looked upon as a variety of E. saligna. 
As regards E. punctata and E. propinqua, the timber and bark 
of the two species resemble each other a good deal; they may be, 
for all practical purposes, identical. They also agree in the 
flattened peduncles and the stamens (points of resemblance, how- 
ever, not peculiar to these two species). 
Differences. — They differ in the size of the flower-buds and 
fruits, which in E. propinqua are quite small; E. propinqua has 
narrow lanceolate leaves and also has more parallel and less 
prominent lateral veins than E. punctata. The calyx-tube and 
also the operculum of E. propinqua are more distinctly hemis- 
pherical and its flowers more pedicellate. 
The fruit of E. punctata, though variable in size, is always 
larger and more cylindrical than that of E. propinqua. 
We are fully aware that E. punctata, as at present defined, is 
a somewhat unsatisfactory species, and it is our intention to fully 
deal with the matter, in its proper order, in the series of Notes 
on New South Wales Eucalypts which we will shortly commence 
to submit to the Society. 
Range. — From the Hawkesbury River northwards at least as 
far as the Tweed River. We have no evidence yet as to whether 
it extends to Queensland, but it very probably does. Going west 
it has been found on the eastern slopes of the Dividing Range. 
EXPLANATION OF PLATE. 
Fig. 1. — Two twigs, showing variation in width of leaves. 
Fig. 2. — Part of a leaf, showing venation, and also slight recurving of edge. 
Fig. 3.-— Vertical section of a bud. 
Fig. 4. — ,, ,, of an expanded flower. 
Fig. 5. — Front and back view of anther. 
Fig. 6. — Individual fruits. 
