113 
SPECIFIC USE OF COMMON NAMES CONDEMNED. 
The application of European timber names to Australian hardwoods has 
pei aps gone too far for recall; but surely New Zealand furniture dealers should 
know when they sell beautiful suites of furniture as “Australian oak” that the 
?K)od is not oak at all, but the product of Eucalyptus trees. 
Maiden records the vernacular names as a matter of historic information, but 
without either commending or condemning their use in forestry and trade. Baker 
admits them into his Hardwoods of Australia , but near the end of the volume 
expresses icgiet for having done so. After discussing the prevalent confusion 
due to use of the common names, and the advantage gained by the essential oil 
indust 1 v thiough exclusive use of the scientific names, he states his well considered 
judgment m the two sentences here followingWhy then cannot the whole 
trade follow suit and thus for all time remove the present lamentable chaotic 
confusion surrounding our timber nomenclature”. “I regret that the colour plates 
had been piinted before this article was written, otherwise every common name 
would have been deleted from this work”. ( Hardwoods 388). It is obvious that 
Mi. Baker regards the reform of the common nomenclature as impossible; and 
where he with his intimate knowledge of the trees and their timbers can see no hope 
in any process of patching and mending we may take it as certain that nobody 
will succeed. 
In New Zealand, foresters and amateur tree planters are learning the botanical 
names very fast, and coming more and more to appreciate the accuracy and 
certainty with which, by means of them, they may understand what tree or what 
timber is meant when a name is mentioned. Many of the most successful growers 
do not know the common names and would not on any account be bothered with 
them. 
Timber dealers are the most hesitant about using the botanical names; and yet 
it is just they who most need protection against the tangle of the common 
nomenclature. It is well known that orders for Australian hardwoods going 
forward under common names can have no certainty of specific fulfilment. Dealers 
who wish to obtain one particular timber may find themselves supplied with 
another without any possible hope of redress. They are using a nomenclature that 
has no exact descriptions and.no effective means for preventing half a dozen 
timbers being called by the same name. They must accept what comes and make 
the best of it. If, instead of going on in this hopeless way, dealers would 
persistently use the botanical names, samples of the timber received could be sent 
to a laboratory or technological museum and tested by comparison with certified 
specimens of the species named. Substitution of one timber for another would be 
branded as wrong, and would soon become very much less frequent. The aim of 
both science and trade should be to use language and maintain practices that will 
permit neither misunderstanding nor evasion. 
The day should be past for importing into New Zealand Eucalyptus hardwoods 
under such names as “jarrah”, “karri”, “spotted-gum”, “white-mahogany”, or 
“black-butt”. The names should be Euc. marginata, Euc. diversicolor, Euc. 
maculata, Euc. acmenioides, and Euc. pilularis (if the NT.S.W. tree is 
meant). Ironbark, as we have seen, is a group name, and should never 
be used in trade at all unless limited by the botanical name of the 
