Ill 
CORRECT USE OF COMMON NAMES. 
SECTION VI. 
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS. 
NOMENCLATURE. 
Hie eucalypts have two sets of names. We call the one set common or 
vernacular names, the other set botanical or scientific names. In most cases the 
common names were given by people who were neither scientific in observation nor 
gifted m description. The botanical names were given by people who had been 
tiained to disciiminate between natural objects and accurately to record the results 
of their research. In the common nomenclature it often happens that the same 
name is given to trees that belong to several cpiite distinct species. The reverse 
practice also exists of bestowing more than one name upon a single species. In 
the botanical nomenclature no specific name can be given to more than one 
species, and no species can ultimately claim more than one specific name. The 
common names have not been registered in any way that has fixed their meaning 
and application. The botanical names with their attached specific descriptions 
have all been published in journals or books that are preserved for future reference. 
Such names and descriptions, moreover, are maintained under a code of honour 
long established amongst the scientific men of all nations. Usage is largely on the 
side ol the common names; accuracy all on the side of the botanical names. In 
the interests of both science and trade the common names should be everywhere 
discouraged and the botanical names brought more fully into use. A quite fair 
statement will require us to consider the two sets of names separately as well as 
in their relation to each other. 
THE COMMON 1 OR VERNACULAR NAMES. 
Common names are applied to the eucalypts in two quite distinct ways. In the 
one case they denote groups of species; in the other case individual or single 
species. The one practice is useful or at least harmless; the other has everywhere 
led to confusion. The distinction must be made clear. 
(a) COMMON NAMES USED TO DENOTE GROUPS. 
If we speak or write in the plural about bloodwoods or mahoganies or boxes or 
ironbarks or stringybarks or peppermints, it is well understood that we are applying 
the names to groups, not to individual species. The grouping is founded mainly 
upon similarity in hark or in wood or in both. Botanists admit the validity of the 
grouping in certain cases, hut always subject to the proviso that every constituent 
unit or species in each group shall have a scientific description and a registered 
name that cannot be appropriated by any other species. Thus restricted and safe¬ 
guarded, the arrangement in groups is convenient and helpful to both the practical 
forester and the scientific student. 
Y 
