76 
Tasmania and Victoria. I have elsewhere called it New South Wales Blue Gum by 
way of distinction, but, as this is such a ponderous name, that of “ Sydney Blue 
Gum” may be more acceptable; often also called “ Flooded Gum.” The question 
of “ Blue and Flooded Gum” is referred to at page 79. 
In the South Coast district sometimes it is called “Woolly Butt,” because of 
its confusion with the true Woolly Butt, the two trees resembling each other a good 
deal in this particular district. I draw attention to the matter in this connection, 
because, in this district at least, our Blue Gum is inferior in durability to the true 
Woolly Butt (E. longifolia), so much so that it is there rarely used for posts and 
other underground work. In the same district it is also called “ Redwood.” 
O 
The variety parvijlora has other names in addition to “ Blue or Flooded 
Gum” (see p. 84). 
Uniformity of Nomenclature.—I could hardly choose a better species of 
Eucalyptus than this to point out the great practical difficulty of securing a uniform 
nomenclature for some of the species. Here the same species is consistently called 
in different parts of New South Wales and Queensland “ Blue Gum,” “ Flooded 
Gum,” and “ Redwood.” I have said that all these belong to one species. How, 
then, can a man say, “ Call each species by one common name, and one alone” ? 
Let us see how that works out in practice :— 
Blue Gum. —This name has already been appropriated by Eucalyptus 
globulus, the Tasmanian or Victorian Blue Gum, so that, beyond Australia, one 
must specify the State to be free from ambiguity. In other words, the term Blue 
Gum cannot be reserved for E. saligna. Suppose we ship home some paving blocks 
labelled “Blue Gum” (as we in New South Wales know Blue Gum). They are 
bought, we will say, by a London Vestry. They order some more, and this time 
they receive “ Blue Gum” blocks as different as can be in colour and other pro¬ 
perties. They have been supplied with E. globulus this time. The Surveyor of the 
Vestry says, “ I will have no more of your Australian Blue Gum, which seems to 
me a very variable article, and upsets all my plans.” The reply is, “ Oh ! but one 
is the Victorian sort, and the other is the New South Wales sort.” Mr. Surveyor 
answers, “ I never was taught anything about New South Wales and Victoria when 
I was at school, but I do know something about Australia, and, when I ordered 
Australian Blue Gum blocks, these people send me a red timber on one occasion and 
a white one on another. I will have no more to do with 'Australian timbers until 
Australians agree about the names.” Is this a fanciful dialogue ? I think not, or, 
rather, I am sure not, both from what I have read and from conversations I have 
had with Englishmen interested in Australian timbers. There is a great deal more 
in the nomenclature of our timbers than many people imagine, if we desire to 
develop an export trade in them. I hope the Parliaments will make an enactment 
rendering it compulsory to export our timbers (no matter from what Australian 
port) under unambiguous names (as per Schedule). 
