7 
affinity. I have not seen the fruits of E. cimicina; the flowers are few in the 
umbel, while those of the common swamp form are usually smaller and more in the 
umbel. This swamp form is not usually a tall tree; it is rather crooked and its 
timber is inferior, that of the normal species being good. Its foliage is dense, and 
its leaves broader and coarser than those of the type. Its opercula are usually 
slender and even subulate. Naudin thought it should be given specific rank, and 
hence called it E. amplifolia. 
So that we have a Stinking Gum (E. cimicina, R.Br.) in Northern Queens¬ 
land, which Bentham named E. tereticornis, var. latifolia; we have also a Stinking 
or Swamp Gum (E. amplifolia, Naudin) of Eastern Australia—Central Queensland 
to Southern New South Wales. 
I suggested ( Bulletin Herb. Eoissier, 1902) that these two Stinking Gums 
come under Bentham’s variety, but if not, our Stinking or Swamp Gum may be 
called variety amplifolia; some may think as Naudin did, that it is worthy of specific 
rank. 
I have E. cimicina from Shoalwater Bay Passage, Percy Island, and Mackay, 
all in Northern Queensland. 
All the forms which now follow come under E. amplifolia, Naudin. 
The “ Swamp Gum ” has often very quadrangular stems, and has sometimes 
markedly triplinerved leaves ( e.g., Wingello specimens). This quadrangular 
character is especially marked in specimens from Tenterfield to Sandy Elat, but it 
is frequent in other specimens. 
“ Of those with the larger and broader leaves, their timber is often next to 
worthless.”—(A. Rudder, in Agricultural Gazette, January 1896, p. 15.) Mr. 
Rudder brought this matter under my notice thirteen years ago, but I had not then 
sufficient material to make a general statement. Normal tereticornis timber is 
undoubtedly durable and valuable, but the “ Swamp Gum ” is not so. A form of 
variety brevifolia, which also grows in low-lying situations, and other forms, are also 
inferior. As a general rule, it may be stated that Eucalyptus timbers grown in moist 
situations are deficient in durability and strength. We are now able to understand 
the conflicting statements in regard to the timber of E. tereticornis. At the same 
time, under Wingello, I give an account of a tree which is undoubtedly the same 
form, but it grows on hills (rarely on flats), and is reputed a good timber. 
I think it is very probable that some of the local prejudice in regard to the 
timber of vars. latifolia, squamosa, etc., arises from the stunted, scrambling look of 
the trees, their growing in damp situations, and their usual faultiness. Nevertheless, 
I think that the timber will often be found to be durable in damp ground, e.g., for 
posts, although not useful for many other purposes, because long straight lengths 
cannot usually be obtained. This form is mainly confined to New South Wales. 
B 
