Part 48

  ― 225 ―

LXI. E. paniculata Sm.

IN Mr. R. T. Baker's paper, “Some Ironbarks of New South Wales” (Journ. Roy. Soc. N. S. W., ii, 410, 1917), the very important step was taken of splitting up E. paniculata into three species (E. paniculata Sm., with E. Fergusoni and E. Nanglei proposed as new), because of variation in the timber. It seems to me that the proposals add to the worries of both botanists and timbermen.

Variation in colour of timbers.—Mr. Baker (op. cit., pp. 410–413) discusses the matter of variation in Ironbark timbers, and following are some of his observations. Thus, p. 410, “Under what has been commonly known as E. paniculata, it was found that several distinct [my italics] timbers occur .…” Although he subsequently refers to other differences, they are vague, and his chief emphasis is in regard to colour.

In p. 412 “.… my experience .… is that Eucalyptus timber variations are not great wherever grown, especially colour of timbers, certainly not in a range of several colours.”

In p. 413 we have “.… four distinct timbers, and .… it is difficult to admit that so wide a range of colours and qualities can exist under one species .…” “If four distinct woods are to be placed under the same species-name, then it will be the exception to the rule of constancy [my italics] that I have so far found to obtain in our timbers.” He then proceeds to take “the white, grey or light chocolate coloured timber as the type paniculata, then apart from other characters we have remaining, a deep chocolate timber, a pink timber, and a deep red one, for which names are required, and it is now proposed to give those specific rank.”

So that the reasons for separating E. Fergusoni and E. Nanglei are based on differences in (1) timber, (2) “other characters,” and we will consider these separately.

The coloured photographs of timber accompanying Mr. Baker's paper probably do not do his sections justice, but I see no great difficulty in placing those attributed to E. Fergusoni and E. Nanglei with E. paniculata, so far as colours are concerned.

The Rev. Dr. Woolls, in the letter quoted to me at p. 238, speaks of the variation of timber according to age, and also to the soil. We do not know, except in very general terms, the amount of variation in colour and other physical characters owing to environment.

I shall further deal with this matter of colour when I come to treat Eucalyptus timbers in general. It is a very difficult subject, for hardly two authorities describe the colour of a particular species in the same way.

Schlich (Manual of Forestry, v, 59) classifies “healthy, freshly-cut woods” of about twenty British and exotic timbers under the headings yellowish-white, bright yellow, greyish-yellow, brownish-yellow, reddish, reddish-brown, golden-brown, dark brown, black. He includes no Eucalypts.

  ― 226 ―

He says, “Some woods may have different shades of colour, as oak, which is either dark or light. This shading of colour in woods may be very marked, and caused by variations of soil and rate of growth, more or less perfect formation of heartwood, &c. .… After wood has been kept for some time its colour usually deepens, and many bright-coloured woods become greyish.”

Timbers vary in colour according as they are green, or seasoned or old. That is why so many timbers are described by some pale colour as white, pink, or pale, and subsequently as brownish, red, or dark.

In my first classification of the Ironbarks of New South Wales, in a paper read before the Sydney Architectural Association on 4th September, 1893, I speak of the timber of E. paniculata as “very pale, pink when fresh.” In my “Notes on the Commercial Timbers of New South Wales” (Second Edition, 1904), I spoke of it (p. 7), as “often pale-coloured, even grey.”

Every timber merchant knows that he has to grade his timbers of the same kind according to weight, colour, grain, &c. I am not referring to different species, but to grading within the same species. This is particularly the case in Northern Europe and North America, with timber of say Pine and Oak. In Australia, as regards our indigenous timbers, we have entered less into the refinements of grading, but even in such reputedly definite timbers as Jarrah, Tallow Wood, the Stringybarks and even the Ironbarks (now under discussion), the timber merchant recognises variations or grades. I have a block of She-oak timber on my study table. When I first had it, some years ago, it was fiery-red, almost loud; it is now an inoffensive reddish-brown or brown.

Speaking of E. paniculata timber at Part XIII, p. 104, I quote the late Augustus Rudder as to its variation in colour. He spent a long life in E. paniculata country, and was shrewd in regard to both botanical and timber differences. See also my remarks on “vernacular names” at p. 105 of the same Part.

Other Reputed Differences between E. paniculata and E. Fergusoni and E. Nanglei.

Quoting Mr. Baker, p. 411, “.… it was found that the trees, in addition to having distinct timbers, differed also in variation of fruit, leaves and bark.”

Mr. Baker does not publish a key to his species Fergusoni and Nanglei (in comparison with E. paniculata), and therefore we have mainly to fall back on the photographs of the fruits as shown in Plate XXI. My point is, elaborated at p. 227, that the forms all run into each other.

Page 419. E. Nanglei. There is a general absence of contrasted characters, an exception being, under E. Nanglei, “the whole plant being coarser than E. paniculata and the fruits are quite characteristic, the chief feature being the rim, which frequently flattens in pressed specimens .… differs from its type E. paniculata in . . shape of fruits .… In botanical sequence it may follow E. Fergusoni, although its organs differ considerably from that species.”

  ― 227 ―

In my anxiety to avoid duplication of drawings, particularly where there is a plate in the “Eucalyptographia,” which is a work that should be read with mine, the drawings selected in the present work may sometimes give rise to some misunderstanding unless the above fact be borne in mind. The Critical Revision drawings are sometimes intended to bring out certain points. Turning to Part XIII, Plate 57, figs. 9e and 16, for example, see legend at p. 131, are intended to show that the fruits may be quite small or may have exserted valves. It does not mean that the form depicted is characteristic of this particular tree, for some of the fruits on this tree may be quite normal; it simply warns readers of an ascertained aberration in E. paniculata.

Further, the young foliage may become very coarse (large and thick), especially in exposed situations such as Ulladulla and Kincumber. Indeed the same thing is noticed at Dungog, and is by no means rare. In a comparatively dense forest the leaves may be thinner and smaller, with pale undersides. The figures now published of E. paniculata at Plates 196 and 197 should, taken in conjunction with Plate 57, be sufficiently comprehensive.


It is confined to coastal New South Wales and Queensland so far as we know at present. See Part XIII, p. 105. There is (1921) no satisfactory evidence that it occurs in Victoria.

The individual localities quoted at pp. 106, 107, will not be repeated. I have carefully gone over the specimens with the types of E. Fergusoni and E. Nanglei before me, and find that attempts to sort them out into three species are beyond my capacity. It is quite true that I am able to pick out some specimens in which the fruits match those particular fruits in the specimens which Mr. Baker has selected for his types, but they are associated with other characters which show that the forms cannot be segregated from E. paniculata.

E. paniculata is often found flowering in a dwarf state along the coast, particularly on north heads or headlets, e.g., Ulladulla, Terrigal, First Point, Kincumber.

The list of localities which follows is to be added to those given in Part XIII, p. 106.

I may say that, in common with some other species which occur along the coast, exposed to the strong sea air, and also more inland, E. paniculata has larger coastal fruits. Incidentally it may be stated that the fruits of a species, wherever grown, may be larger if the product of a young vigorous tree, and smaller if near the top of a large tree.

  ― 228 ―

New South Wales.

Forty feet high. Bermagui (Forest Guard W. Dunn). Boyne State Forest No. 147, 10 miles north of Bateman's Bay (Forest Guard L. Walker). About 20 feet high, North Head, Ulladulla (R. H. Cambage No. 4,070).

Heathcote, a few miles south of Sydney (J.H.M.). With suckers in the opposite stage.

Dundas (H. J. Rumsey). Parramatta to Penrith (Rev. Dr. Woolls). Ryde (F. R. Smith). Eurella-street, Burwood (J.H.M.). Lane Cove road, near Gordon (H. Deane). Near Golf Links, Killara (W. F. Blakely and D. W. C. Shiress). Near Gordon Station, on main road (W. F. Blakely). Pymble (W. A. Dixon).

Large tree, bark very rough and dark, younger branches nearly smooth. Asquith, near Hornsby (W. F. Blakely). Large tree of 50 or 60 feet. Bark a dull grey, very rough on barrel and main branches, and smaller ones somewhat smooth, with a few loose fragments of curly bark of 1 or 2 inches hanging from them. Near Oldham, Mt. Colah, near Hornsby (W. F. Blakely).

“A shrub about 10 feet high, growing on exposed hillsides on the coast near Terrigal. Growing in an almost horizontal manner, owing no doubt to its exposure to wind.” (W. A. W. de Beuzeville, April, 1918). First Point, Kincumber (R. H. Cambage and J.H.M.). The juvenile foliage may attain as large a size as that of Wingello (fig. 11, Plate 57).

Raymond Terrace (E. Cheel). Grey Ironbark, Williams River (J. L. Boorman). Scrub Ironbark, Dungog (W. F. Blakely). The fruits from a very old tree are smaller. Nelson's Bay, Port Stephens (J. L. Boorman). Grey Ironbark. Good flow of good quality honey. Wauchope (W. D. Goodacre).

Settlement Lease No. 63, parish Wondoba, county Pottinger, poor hilly country. (Forest Guard M. H. Simon).

Torrington (J. L. Boorman).

Woodford Island, Clarence River (E. J. Hadley). “Grey Ironbark,” Rappville, 17 miles from Casino (C. L. Campbell). Parish Dyraaba, county Rous, Casino; also Richmond Range (E. G. McLean).


Benarkin (Forest Inspector Twine, through C. T. White). Beenleigh (Dr. J. Shirley). Cabbage-tree Creek, Sandgate, with roots almost in salt water (C. T. White).

“Grey Ironbark.” Waterworks-road, Brisbane (J. L. Boorman). Kedron; Mt. Gravatt. (Near Brisbane, C. T. White).

Aspley (E. Bilbrough). Fraser Island (W. R. Petrie).

Parish Boondooma, 70 miles north-west of Wondai (Forest Guard Higgins, through C. T. White). Gympie (L. Hirst).

“Grey Ironbark.” Black heartwood. Blackbutt (R. W. Jolly).

  ― 229 ―

I quote the original descriptions of both E. Fergusoni and E. Nanglei.

E. Fergusoni R. T. Baker, in Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., li, 415 (1917). (Bloodwood-bark Ironbark.)

Description.—A tall fine typical specimen of an Ironbark, with a facies in the field of something approaching a “Bloodwood,” from the nature of the bark, which resembles somewhat those species of Eucalypts. It is probably the thinnest bark of all the Ironbarks, and lacks the deep furrows so common to the group, being friable and so very short in the fibre on the exterior half, but hard and compact and deep red in colour for the remaining thickness, there being almost an entire absence of kino. The early leaves, say two or three, are at first rather broadly lanceolate, from 7 to 9 inches long and 2½ to 3 inches broad, but later leaves much smaller and less coriaceous than the earlier ones, venation distinct, intramarginal vein removed from the edge, lateral veins medium oblique. Normal leaves lanceolate, falcate, varying in length and width, and may be described in a general way as only medium size for an ironbark, not thick; venation not at all distinct as a rule, intramarginal vein removed from the edge, lateral veins fairly oblique. Inflorescence paniculate-corymbose, but when developed into the fruiting stage becoming almost corymbose. Calyx pyriform, ribbed. Operculum conical, the rim of the calyx bulging beyond the base of it. Fruits pear-shaped on a long slender pedicel, strongly four-ribbed, contracted at the rather thin rim, valves deeply inserted, 9 lines long and 4 lines wide.

Timber.—The colour is a deep red or reddish chocolate when fresh cut, but rather inclined to become a lighter red when aged. It is hard, heavy, straight or interlocked in the grain, which may be described as rather open, the vessels being conspicuous in a longitudinal cut, and appearing as whitish streaks. It planes and dresses well, and is suitable for all kinds of heavy constructional works.

In its economics it is probably equal to the very best of other Ironbarks, such as E. crebra, E. paniculata, E. siderophloia.

Then follows an account of the microscopic structure of the timber.

Geographical Range.—Bulladelah and Wingello.

(I have received from Mr. Baker a specimen labelled Bulladelah (L. C. Maxwell, October, 1916), as typical for E. Fergusoni.)

Affinities.—It is not easy to place this species in its systematic sequence, as whilst timber places it near E. siderophloia, the bark, leaves and fruits especially differentiate it from that species, as these features also do from other described species of Ironbarks, E. crebra, E. paniculata, E. sideroxylon, E. Caleyi, E. drepanophylla.

It might be placed between E. siderophloia and the pink Ironbark of this paper, E. Nanglei. (Original description.)

“Research has shown that the timber of this tree was exhibited at the Paris International Exhibition of 1862, under the name of E. crebra, but later this name was changed on the specimen fto E. paniculata.” (End of original description.)

Following are my own comments:—

1. The word Paris in connection with 1862 is, of course, a slip of the pen. No specimen of an Ironbark timber named as to species was exhibited either in the Paris Exhibition of 1855, or in the London Exhibition of 1862.

2. The “timber of this tree” refers to one of a number of little hand-samples, being Sir William Macarthur's reference set (it was he who made the New South Wales timber collections for these exhibitions). These were spoken about to me by Sir William at Camden Park in February, 1881, and some years later they were presented by Mrs. Macarthur Onslow, his niece, and placed by me in the Technological Museum.

  ― 230 ―

3. I spent much time on these specimens (including those which are Ironbarks) between the years 1885 and 1896 (when I was transferred to the Botanic Gardens), with the printed catalogues of these Exhibitions before me, and made some notes. The gist of those notes, as regards Nos. 1, 3, 8 of the specimens of the London Exhibition of 1862, will be found at Part XIII, p. 106, of the present work, under E. paniculata, and a reference to E. crebra will be seen. The name crebra was marked by me on a specimen, and afterwards changed by me to paniculata. All this happened many years ago, and I think paniculata is probably correct.

E. Nanglei R. T. Baker, in Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., li, 418 (1917), with three figures of the fruit at Plate 21. (Pink Ironbark.)

Description.—An average forest tree with a very thick, compact, deeply furrowed bark, containing large quantities of kino. Leaves lanceolate, the early-growth leaves might be described as broadly lanceolate, and of a thin texture; veins finely prominent, and not very oblique; usual leaves mostly straight, lanceolate, venation not at all prominent; lateral veins oblique, and more so than in the earlier leaves; intramarginal vein rather close to the edge. Inflorescence paniculate or axillary at the neds of the branchlets but in the fruiting stage, the leaves having fallen, the capsules appear in quite a paniculate form. Buds under an inch long, calyx pyriform; operculum conical. Fruits inclined to pilular, constricted at the rather short pedicel or pyriform, more or less contracted at the rim, where it is more or less flat or broad; in some instances very slightly ribbed at the base or pedicel, valves not exserted, or just a little so.

Timber.—A very fine timber with a distinct clear pink or red colour, and having the facies rather of E. rostrata, E. tereticornis, or E. propinqua, than that of an Ironbark. It may be described as close-grained, heavy, hard, but does not plane to so bony a face as Ironbarks, having a tendency to splinter up almost immediately after planing. It is not so heavy as other Ironbarks, probably being the lightest in weight of any of them.

General.—The timber of this tree is quite distinct from the White or Grey Ironbark of this paper, and the two could not be correctly placed under one species, especially in a public collection of timbers such as obtains in the Technological Museum. No tradesman or timber expert would pass them as one and the same wood, and it was these particular differences that influenced me to separate these trees as distinct. The bark is not so deeply furrowed nor quite so thick as in most Ironbarks, but has a fair amount of kino scattered throughout its structure, the inner layer is also thinner for so large a tree. It is also easy of determination in herbarium material, and the whole plant being coarser than E. paniculata, and the fruits are quite characteristic, the chief feature being the rim which frequently flattens in pressed specimens.

It is difficult to trace references to this tree, but it is just possible that, owing to its paniculate inflorescence, it may have been confounded with E. paniculata, and perhaps Dr. Woolls, when first recording the colour of the wood of E. paniculata as Red may have had material of this species, vide remarks by J. H. Maiden under E. paniculata.

This species differs from its type E. paniculata, principally in the physical properties of its timbers, such as colour and texture, also in inflorescence, shape of fruits and nature of bark, and the same remarks apply to other Ironbarks. In botanical sequence it may follow E. Fergusoni, although the organs differ considerably (they have not been stated, J.H.M.) from that species, as well as from the other Ironbarks.

Geographical Range.—It has a wide range, preserving its specific features well throughout its distribution. Localities at present known to me are Morisset, Stroud, Bulladelah, Woy Woy, Lindfield, Nowra. (End of Mr. Baker's description.)

I have picked out a number of herbarium specimens whose facies most generally resemble that of E. Nanglei as represented by the specimens presented by Mr. Baker, but they run into E. Fergusoni and both into E. paniculata inextricably.

  ― 231 ―

CCLXXIV. E. decorticans sp. nov.

ARBOR magna, cortice nigricante dura sulcata, E. siderophloide similibus; ramis albis, laevibus, deciduis, ligno rubro mediocre; foliis junioribus angustissimis lineari-lanceolatis vel lanceolatis; foliis maturis lanceolatis utrimque aeque viridibus, venis (praeter costam mediam) inconspicuis; calycis tubo obconico in pedicellum brevem angustato; operculo plerumque obtuso; fructu ovoideo-cylindrico, 7 mm. diametro, valvarum apicibus paulo exsertis.

Bark.—On the butt blackish, hard, furrowed, with flattish ridges after the fashion of E. siderophloia but with bare branches as described by Dr. T. L. Bancroft in the following extract from a letter:—“A remarkably fine tree, like a large Grey Ironbark, but the branches of the top, up to the size of a man's arm or even thicker, are white in colour; covered with a thin, smooth bark; the bark is always peeling off these thin branches, and the ground below is strewn with it after the style of E. hemiphloia.”

Timber inferior in quality, colour red.

Juvenile leaves.—Extremely narrow, linear lanceolate to lanceolate, some specimens having an average length of 5 or 6 dm. and a diameter of 8 cm., oil dots abundant.

Mature leaves.—Lanceolate, slightly curved, acuminate, equally green on both sides, drying to a pale green, venation (except the midrib) inconspicuous, the lateral viens very fine and somewhat spreading, the marginal vein close to or very near the edge.

Flowers.—Umbels three to six flowered, usually three or four together in short axillary or terminal panicles, the peduncles angular. Calyx-tube obconical with one or two angles, tapering into a short pedicel. Operculum usually blunt-pointed, about as long as the calyx-tube. Stamens inflected in the bud, anthers broad, white, opening at the sides, filament at the base, small gland at the top.

Fruit.—Ovoid cylindrical, and 7 mm. in diameter, often with one or two angles, with a darker coloured rim hardly constructed at the orifice, the tips of the valves slightly protruding.

This form is known as “Mountain Ironbark,” “Naked Top Ironbark,” or “Gum Top.”

This description is based on one in Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., xlvii, 80 (1913), but we have acquired additional information concerning it, and it now seems distinct, and therefore a name should be given to it. I have therefore pleasure in bringing Mr. F. M. Bailey's forma decorticans (of E. siderophloia) up to specific rank, if that be admissible. I take the opportunity (in addition to the name of Dr. Bancroft already quoted) of saying how indebted I am to Mr. C. T. White, the Government Botanist of Queensland, for valuable help.


E. siderophloia Benth. forma decorticans Bailey, in Queensland Agric. Journ., xxvi, 127 (March, 1911).

“This tree resembles the narrow-leaved forms of the species (siderophloia), differing principally in the bark of the branches, even when as thick as a man's arm, being deciduous.” (Complete original description.)

  ― 232 ―


So far as we know at present it has only been received from the Burnett River district of Queensland. It was originally sent by Dr. T. L. Bancroft, its discoverer, from Eidsvold, where it occurs on rocky mountainous country, associated with E. siderophloia. Mr. Forest Guard S. J. Higgins (sent by Mr. C. T. White), collected it in the parish of Boondooma, but there is no doubt that, having been confused with other Ironbarks, it has an extensive range.


With E. drepanophylla F.v.M.

In Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., xlvii, 80, I considered E. decorticans to be specifically identical with E. drepanophylla, but additional material has caused me to form a different opinion. Phylogenetically, E. drepanophylla may be looked upon as a coarse form of E. crebra, and most observers do not discriminate between those two species, many of the references to E. crebra including E. drepanophylla. It is possible that E. decorticans has, like E. drepanophylla, evolved from E. crebra. I attach great importance to Dr. Bancroft's observations. He says E. decorticans is a denizen of dry, rocky hillsides, while E. crebra grows on flatter country. E. decorticans has a deciduous bark on the branches, and a poor timber, differing from E. crebra in both these respects.

The anthers of E. decorticans are semi-terminal, or approaching the group provisionally termed Porantheroid; those of E. drepanophylla are small, opening in parallel slits, simulating those of E. crebra.

Partly because of the narrowness of the juvenile leaves (borne out, I may say, in the seedlings), I wrote to Dr. Bancroft about the relation of the new species (decorticans) to the widely diffused E. crebra. He replied: “I am absolutely certain that the sucker leaves are extremely narrow, more so a lot than those of E. crebra. The new species and E. crebra do not grow together.” In another letter he says that they are as narrow as those of E. Seeana Maiden. See fig. 1a, Plate 132, Part xxxii, of the present work.

  ― 233 ―

CCLXXV. E. Culleni R. H. Cambage.

In Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., liv, 48 (1920), with Plate 1.

FOLLOWING is the original description:—

ARBOR alta quadraginta vel quinquaginta pedes, trunci diametrum unciarum duodeviginti ad duo pedes habens.

Folia matura.—Linearia-lanceolata circiter sex ad quattuordecim cm. longa, octo mm. ad 15 cm. lata, cum apicibus directis vel uncis, interdum leviter falcata, utrobique cinerose viridia, glabrosa, costa media clara, venae laterales aliquanto obscurae et dispositae angulo circiter 45° ecosta, margines plerumque quasi nervi vena intra marginem juxta extremitatem, olei glandulae parvae sed numerosae, petiolus a quinque mm. ad unum cm. longus.

Gemmae globosae, tubus calycis hemisphericalis duo mm. longus, diametrus quattuor mm. habens, operculum simile tubo calycis, terminatum cuspide brevi circiter ·5 mm. longa, pediculi circiter quinque mm. longi, pedunculi teretes a quinque mm. ad 1·1 cm. in parte intera paniculae.

Flores pedicellati, umbellae in paniculis terminalibus vel nonnullae in axillis superioribus, cum floribus a tribus ad septem, antherae parvae patentes late laterale, glandula a tergo filum a fundamento.

Fructus hemisphericales tres ad quattuor mm. longi, diametrum a sex ad septem mm. habentes, ora excitata, circiter 1·5 mm. lati, valvae exsertae, pedunculi a quinque mm. ad 1·2 cm. longi.

Cortex dura, aspera et sulcata.

Lignum rubrum, durum et durabile, consuetissimum in fodinis apud “Chillagoe.”

A tree of 40–50 feet high, with stem diameter of 18 inches to 2 feet.

Mature leaves linear-lanceolate, from about 6–14 cm. long, 8 mm. to 1·5 cm. broad, with straight or hooked points sometimes slightly falcate, greyish-green on both sides, glabrous, midrib distinct, lateral veins rather obscure, and arranged at an angle of about 45 degrees with the midrib, margins usually nerve like, intramarginal vein close to the edge, oil glands small but numerous, petiole 5 mm. to 1 cm. long.

Buds globular, calyx-tube hemispherical, 2 mm. long, 4 mm. in diameter, operculum similar to calyx-tube, terminating in short point about ·5 mm. long, pedicels about 5 mm. long, peduncles terete, 5 mm. to 1·1 cm. in the lower portion of the panicle.

Flowers pedicellate, umbels in terminal panicles or some in the upper axils, with three to seven flowers, anthers small, opening widely laterally, gland at back, filament at base.

Fruits hemispherical, 3–4 mm. long, 6–7 mm. in diameter, rim raised, about 1·5 mm. broad, valves exserted, peduncles 5 mm. to 1·2 cm. long.

Bark hard, rough and furrowed.

Timber red, hard and durable, much used in the Chillagoe mines.

The species blooms in March, and I am indebted to Miss Ethel K. Maitland for flowers.

Reversion (“sucker”) foliage.—Ovate-lanceolate, 3–7 cm. long, 5 mm. to 2 cm. broad, so far as seen.

Seedlings.—Hypocotyl terete, red, 3 mm. to 1 cm. long, 1 mm. thick at base, glabrous.

  ― 234 ―

Cotyledons obtusely quadrilateral to reniform, entire, 2·5–3 mm. long, 4–7 mm. broad, upperside green, underside red; petiole 3 mm. long.

Stem brownish-red in lower portion, brownish-green in upper part.

Seedling foliage opposite for about two or three pairs, entire, glabrous, linear; petiole 2–4 mm. First pair 1·6–2·4 cm. long, 1–2 m.m broad, upperside green, underside purple; leaves Nos. five to ten up to 5 cm. long, 2–3 mm. broad.

A seedling about one foot high has an opposite pair of nodules or swellingsnote about the axils of the cotyledons or the first pair of leaves.

The species is named in honour of Sir William Portus Cullen, K.C.M.G., M.A., LL.D., Chief Justice of New South Wales and Chancellor of the University of Sydney, who has done much to encourage the preservation of our native flora.


It is confined to North Queensland, so far as we know at present.

Alma-den, 121 miles by rail westerley from Cairns, tropical Queensland, about 1,600 feet above sea-level, growing on granite formation containing about 68–70 per cent. silica, and known as Ironbark. (No. 3,905, collected August, 1913.) Mr. J. H. Maiden informs me that he received an incomplete specimen of this species from Chillagoe in 1911. (Original description.)


Its closest affinity appears to be with E. crebra F.v.M., which it resembles in bark, timber, and mature leaves, but differs in the shape of buds and fruits, and in the seedling foliage. It also resembles E. paniculata Sm., in its bark, but differs in the timber and other characters.

  ― 235 ―

CCLXXVI. E. Beyeri R. T. Baker.

In Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., li, 420 (1917), with figure of the fruit. Syn. E. paniculata var. angustifolia Woolls (sic.). See p. 236. (Narrow-leaved Ironbark.)

FOLLOWING is the original description:—

A tree with a tall giant stem, surmounted with rather a straggling, sparsely-leaved head. Bark hard, heavy, very thick, permeated with kino. Leaves lanceolate throughout, those of the early stage very narrow lanceolate, thin, almost membranous, average foliage leaf wider in proportion to the length, not thick, the base tapering and evenly balanced, oblique or rounded. Venation in some cases well marked. Buds small, calyx tapering into a proportionately long and slender pedicel; operculum conical. Fruits pyriform, shining, pedicel slender, rim thin, valves attached at the base below the rim, not exserted, 3 lines long and 2 lines in diameter.

Timber.—A dark chocolate-coloured timber, mostly interlocked, heavy, very hard, and having a great reputation for durability; and so is one of the finest Ironbarks of the country. It could be used for all kinds of heavy constructional works, such as wharves, beams, posts, bridges, heavy carriage, and coach work. It is a valuable timber, and not easily confounded with any other yet described.

(Then follows a description of the microscopic characters of the timber, which can be referred to in the original). Irving W. Bailey, in Journal of Forestry, xv, 176 (February, 1917), gives a warning note as to the use of the microscope for timber diagnosis.

Mr. Baker's type is figured at fig. 1, Plate 199, and it will be seen that it is impossible to separate it from fig. 21, Plate 57.

Named after Mr. George Beyer, who for several years was Herbarium Assistant in the Technological Museum, and in which capacity he did much to help on the researches in economic botany, and still continues to do so in his office of chief clerk in that institution. (End of original description.)

It will be noticed that there is no reference in the original description to the anthers so far as their dehiscence is concerned, and the only reference to the stamens is “outer stamens anantherous” (Woolls). The opportunity of making a pronouncement on this essential point was not availed of (p. 420).


E. paniculata Sm. var. angustifolia Benth.

The name E. paniculata var. angustifolia Woolls, as quoted by Mr. Baker, was adopted (not created) by Woolls.

  ― 236 ―


The affinity of E. Beyeri as regards anthers (see fig. 3d, Plate 199) is with E. paniculata, and not with E. crebra, which it often closely resembles in narrowness of leaves, slenderness of branchlets, smallness of fruits; and it seems to me, the question is whether it should be considered (as Bentham and Woolls considered it), as a form of E. paniculata, if its specific rank be not conceded. The anther of E. crebra has a small gland at the top, and it is comparatively broad at the base. In E. paniculata and E. Beyeri the anther is broad at the top.

E. Beyeri has been known for at least half a century, and let us consider what has been written about it.

A. Bentham's views:—

Eucalyptus paniculata Sm. var. angustifolia. Leaves narrow and thin, as in some varieties of E. crebra. Umbels loose, paniculate. Operculum conical. Outer stamens anantherous. New South Wales, “Narrow-leaved Iron-bark,” Woolls (B.Fl. iii, 212, 1886).

Woolls' specimens for the Flora Australiensis would have been forwarded to Bentham some years ago with notes on the labels.

B. Rev. Dr. Woolls' views:—

1. “A contribution to the flora of Australia” (1867). In writing the later chapters of this work, Mr. (afterwards Rev. Dr.) Woolls had Bentham's views before him. At p. 242 he says:—

Speaking of E. paniculata and E. crebra: these are mere varieties of the `white Iron Bark,' one of the most valuable trees in the colony. … I feel no hesitation in uniting E. paniculata and E. crebra as one species, although there is an occasional difference in the quality of the wood, and in the size of the flower-buds as well as in the texture of the leaves. In the form angustifolia, the flowers are very small, and bear a great resemblance to those of E. bicolor, or the Bastard Box.

2. E. angustifolia is regarded as a variety of E. paniculata, but the workmen, judging only from the wood, call it a distinct species, by the name of the Narrow-leaved Ironbark. (Lect. Veg. Kingd., 123, 1879.)

I think this is a slip of the pen for E. paniculata var. angustifolia Benth. E. angustifolia Woolls is a nomen nudum for lack of description, and if it were not, the name is preoccupied by E. angustifolia R.Br., a synonym of E. amygdalina Labill. See Part VI of the present work, p. 151.

3. In “Plants indigenous in the neighbourhood of Sydney” (1880 edition), under Schizophloiæ, we have “E. crebra F.v.M., E. paniculata Sm., and also E. sp., doubtful,” which is not the variety angustifolia above referred to.

4. In a paper, “Eucalypts of the County of Cumberland” (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., v. 293 (1881)), under Schizophloiæ, we have “E. sp. F.v.M.; E. crebra F.v.M.; and E. paniculata Sm., and var. angustifolia Benth.”

  ― 237 ―

5. “He (Rev. Dr. Woolls) again refers to it in Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., 1880, p. 503, as only to be distinguished from E. crebra by having its outer stamens anantherous, although practical men easily distinguish them by their wood and bark.” (Quoted by Mr. Baker.)

This is a reference to Vol. V (1881), and we have, in a continuation of the preceding paper, dealing with the Schizophloiæ, “E. paniculata varies in the colour of the wood from white to red, and, therefore, is sometimes called `White' and sometimes `Red Ironbark,' while on the Blue Mountains the pale variety has the name of `Brush Ironbark' .…, and in dried specimens var. angustifolia is only to be distinguished from E. crebra by having its outer stamens anantherous, although practical men easily distinguish them by their wood and bark.”

Under E. crebra he says: “According to the artificial (Bentham's anthereal) system, E. crebra stands in the same section with E. siderophloia, though, in its general character, it approaches more closely to the narrow-leaved forms of E. paniculata.”

6. In “The Plants of New South Wales” (1885), at p. 51, we have, under E. paniculata, “There is a narrow-leaved variety of this species very similar to E. crebra, and it can scarcely be distinguished but by the opening of the anthers.”

7. See the paragraph referring to E. paniculata, “There is also a tree .… colour and touch,” in Dr. Woolls' letter to me of 26th September, 1888, below.

8. In “Plants indigenous and naturalised in the neighbourhood of Sydney” (1891), p. 26, we have enumerated “E. crebra F.v.M.; also E. paniculata Sm. and var. angustifolia.”

The Rev. Dr. Woolls' name has been a good deal quoted in regard to E. paniculata and other Ironbarks. I corresponded with him many times in regard to this very subject, and I even took a house at Burwood, near Sydney, where I lived for some years, in order that I might be near him, and I was in his house scores of times for botanical chats, often illustrated by specimens. We often walked about Burwood, Strathfield, Concord, to examine trees he had studied, while he directed my attention to specific trees at Parramatta, Rossmore (then Cabramatta), Bringelly, Richmond, the Kurrajong, chiefly referred to in his writings, which I visited as directed by him. So that I know fairly well his views on County of Cumberland Ironbarks, at all events during the last few years of his life. Following are extracts from one of his Burwood letters of 26th September, 1888, referring to E. panicutata:—

The common names of E. paniculata are White, Pale, Grey, She, Narrow-leaved Ironbark. In some forms of this species the leaves are similar to that of E. crebra, but the anthers are of a different shape and the wood paler in colour. … The true Narrow-leaved Ironbark is E. crebra. It occurs between Sydney and the Mountains (Blue) occasionally, but it abounds at the Kurrajong.

When Sir William Macarthur collected for the Paris Exhibition of 1867 (the New South Wales Catalogue of timbers at the Paris Exhibition of 1867 is a facsimile of that of the London Exhibition of 1862, already referred to, J.H.M.), he had nine logs of Ironbark from the Counties of Cumberland and Camden, and I was the person who called his attention to the Red-flowering Ironbark (E. sideroxylon). He calls E. paniculata White or Pale Ironbark, and says it is the most valuable of all the Ironbarks. I

  ― 238 ―
had several conversations with Sir William about the woods, but at the time he was collecting the third volume of our Flora Australiensis had not arrived in the colony, and so there was a difficulty in determining the species.

There is also a tree (of which I am not certain) called Scrub or Brush or Forest Ironbark—so-called at the Kurrajong—I referred to E. paniculata, whose bark was not so furrowed as the species near Sydney, and the wood was reported to be light in colour and tough. (This is E. Beyeri. J.H.M.)

I have been assured by practical men that the timber varies in proportion to age, and also to the soil in which it grows.

C. Mueller's views:—

E. angustifolia Woolls, “Lectures on the Vegetable Kingdom,” p. 123, is a form of E. crebra. It seems not likely that E. paniculata will ever be taken for E. crebra, as the leaves of the latter are never much unlike in the colour of their two pages, as all the stamens are fertile, the anthers opening in their whole length, and the fruits usually smaller and angular. (“Eucalyptographia,” under E. crebra.)

E. crebra and E. microcorys are also not dissimilar to E. paniculata, and mere fruiting twigs of these three might easily be referred to the wrong species, but in a flowering state the mode of dehiscence of the anthers distinguish them easily from each other, irrespective of several other characteristics. (“Eucalyptographia,” under E. paniculata.)

D. Mr. Baker's views:—

1. In general features, such as leaves, buds, fruits, it very closely resembles E. crebra, and from herbarium material alone might easily be mistaken for E. crebra, but the timber at once readily differentiates it from that species. …

2. With E. paniculata Sm. “The chief differences from the type of E. paniculata are the shape and size of the fruits, shape of the leaves, timber and bark. In botanical sequence it may be placed after the type E. paniculata. …”

The chief features are so distinct from the type E. paniculata, that it is now proposed to raise it to specific rank under the name of E. Beyeri.

3. In p. 420, general statements as to affinities to E. crebra and E. paniculata are made—“from herbarium material alone (it) might easily be mistaken for E. crebra. … In botanical sequence it may be placed after the type E. paniculata. …” “The chief features are so distinct from the type E. paniculata, that it is now proposed to raise it to specific rank,” &c.

As in other proposed species referred to in this paper, the chief reliance is made on difference in the timber. “The timber alone readily differentiates it from that species” (E. crebra), (p. 421).

Previously (p. 420), “It is … not easily confounded with any other (timber) yet described.”

So far I have spent a good deal of time examining timbers connected with herbarium specimens of E. paniculata, and also of pieces of E. Fergusoni, E. Nanglei and E. Beyeri, certified to by Mr. Baker himself. Nor have I relied entirely on my own judgment. I find them all brown, particularly either when kept or taken from an old tree. Of the specimens in my care, that of E. Fergusoni is the reddest, though in most E. paniculata timbers there can be detected some red, particularly in a suitable light. It is because the timber of E. Beyeri seems, so far as my specimens go, the brownest of the lot, that (taken in conjunction with the morphological characters) I think E. Beyeri is worthy of specific rank. But the species is still somewhat unsatisfactory, and, like some others of our species, requires further investigation.

  ― 239 ―


“This tree seems rather restricted in its geographical range, being so far only recorded from Kingswood and St. Mary's, New South Wales.” (Original description.)

Following are specimens which I attribute to E. Beyeri, and which are in the National Herbarium, Sydney. See also the notes with the description of Plate 199, as given at p. 260.

G. Caley's specimens, from the British Museum. The words between inverted commas are in Caley's handwriting:—

  • A. “Ironbark, N. Beach, 13th June, 1804. Thrown down by parrots.” British Museum, No. 33.
  • B. “Torrangora (St. ? Street) boundary. November, 1806. Got by Dan.” British Museum, No. 12.
  • C. “Mogargro, South Brush. Got by Dan” (evidently an assistant, aboriginal, or other). British Museum, No. 27.

Parramatta River, Parramatta (W. F. Blakely and D. W. C. Shiress). Ermington Park, Ermington (W. F. Blakely).

  ― 240 ―

XCVIII. E. globulus Labill.


  • 1. E. globulus Labill., var. St. Johni, R. T. Baker, Journ. Aust. Assoc. Adv. Science, xiv (January, 1913). Also E. St. Johni, R. T. Baker.
  • 2. Vict. Nat., xxx, 127 (November, 1913).

As regards the first reference, Mr. Baker says: “Or sp. nov. … Tentatively placed as a variety.” The description, however, is not sufficient for a new species, nor indeed has the brief Latin description been given, as required by botanical law. Then we have “On a new variety of Eucalyptus globulus—E. globulus, var. St. Johni.,” by R. T. Baker, in Vict. Nat., xxx, 127 (November, 1913).

Following is the paper:—

The Blue Gum, Eucalyptus globulus Labill., has such an extensive range from Southern Tasmania through Victoria to the north of New South Wales, and preserves such a constancy of general morphological characters, that a departure from the normal is of systematic interest; and the honour is due to a Victorian for unearthing this variety. It was discovered by Mr. P. R. H. St. John, on the banks of the Lerderberg River, Bacchus Marsh district, 5th November, 1903, so that at present its location is restricted; but this appears to be the general rule when new species or varieties are discovered. At least a hundred similar trees are growing in the neighbourhood, and there is little doubt but that it will be found to be more widely distributed later on.note

The other species of Eucalypts growing within a square mile of this particular tree are as follows:—E. amygdalina, E. Behriana, E. elœophora, E. leucoxylon, E. melliodora, E. macrorrhyncha, E. hemiphloia, E. polyanthemos, E. sideroxylon, E. viminalis.

The material collected by Mr. St. John is quite complete, consisting of (a) seedling; (b) adventitious shoots, obtained from branch of tree 8 feet from the ground, the tree about 20 years old; (c) leaves from a young tree 6 feet high; (d) leaves from young tree 12 feet high; (e) twig from mature tree, with early buds, mature buds and flowers; (f) twig with fruits from mature tree. The young seedlings have ovatelanceolar, acuminate, petiolate leaves, glaucous above, under surface purplish; the cotyledons or seed-lobes are on slender stalks, and deeply bi-lobed.

(a) The older seedling leaves are oval, sessile, or shortly petiolate, and slightly or not at all cordate; shortly acuminate; not large, about 1½ inches to 2 inches long, and ¾ inch to 1¼ inch or more wide; pale and glaucous on the under side, oil-dots numerous, stem terete, branchlets square.

(b) Similar in shape to those of (a), only longer.

(c) The leaves of the adventitious shoots are longer, orbicular, cordate, lateral veins slightly oblique, parallel, and looping some distance from the edge; branchlets rectangular.

(d) These are large, petiolate, oval, to oval-lanceolate, showing intermediate stage to normal leaves.

(e) This is an interesting specimen, as it shows the inflorescence in every stage. The early stages are characterised by a calyptra, covering two or three buds. The mature buds are more like those of E. Maideni than E. globulus, and differ from the latter in the absence of a second operculum. The calyx is compressed, sessile, about ¼ inch long, ¼ inch and less in width, operculum acuminate, depressed, tuberculate, stamens inflexed before expansion; anthers parallel, opening by longitudinal slits.

  ― 241 ―

Normal leaves lanceolate, falcate, as in the type, with similar venation, 2 inches to 2 feet or more in length, ½ inch to 3 inches broad, on petioles varying from 1 inch to 2 inches long; oil-dots conspicuous.

The fruits of this variety differ considerably in size and other features from the type; they measure about ¼ inch long to ½ inch in diameter.

The edges of the compressed calyx are here seen to have developed into slightly broken ridges; there is quite an absence of the tubercles so pronounced a feature on the type; the rim is sharp and well defined, and slopes down or upwards to the summit of the valves, that vary in number from two to four.

It is the seedling leaves, the presence of a calyptra in the early buds, the absence of double opercula and the fruits which justify, in my opinion, the tree being given varietal rank.

Then follows a plate of fruits of E. globulus and of the variety, but, unfortunately, they are reduced in size, and, therefore, not easy to interpret. However, in 1920, in the work about to be referred to, Mr. Baker speaks of E. St. Johni as if he had described it.

The references to the species in “Research on the Eucalypts” (Baker and Smith, 2nd ed., 1920) are trivial, and are as follows:—

Page 165 (under E. globulus). “A small, smooth-fruited form that has a wide distribution, and seed distributed abroad, is not E. globulus, but E. St. Johni R.T.B.”

Page 287 (under E. coccifera). “The sessile fruits are near perhaps to those of E. St. Johni, except that this rim is nearly flat.”

Surely this is not the way to describe a species at the close of the second decade of the twentieth century.


1. With E. globulus Labill.

From type specimens placed at my disposal, the fruits of E. St. Johni (and the reputed differences from E. globulus turn on the fruits), are figured at fig. 10, Plate 79, Part XVIII, of the present work. The buds are roughened or tubercled. The points made are that the fruits are sessile, small, and smooth. Neither is a constant character as distinct from E. globulus. See the above plate. Most fruits of E. globulus are sessile. As to size, the fruits vary from even smaller than described by Mr. Baker as for E. St. Johni, to the very large fruits of E. globulus found in Tasmania. As regards smoothness, examination of Plate 79 will show that the character is not rare in E. globulus. See figs. 9a, b, c, and it will be observed that we may have roughness and smoothness, with a considerable amount of variation in size, in the same restricted area of trees. In my view, it is not a species, as distinct from E. globulus, and from what I have just said, its acceptance as a variety would be likely to cause confusion.

2. With E. Maideni F.v.M.

For this species, see Plate 80 of Part XVIII. As regards size and smoothness of the particular fruit chosen as typical of E. St. Johni, these characters are common enough in E. Maideni, which may be both sessile and pedicellate. But whether E. St. Johni can stand as a species can best be discussed under E. globulus.

  ― 242 ―

CCLXXVII. E. nova-anglica Deane and Maiden.

In Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxiv, 616 (1899), with a plate.

THE description is given at Part XXI, p. 9, of the present work, and need not be repeated. It is figured at figs. 3–4, Plate 90, and as these are adequate no further illustrations are given.


E. cinerea F.v.M., var. nova anglica Maiden, in Part XXI, p. 9, of the present work. I am of opinion that it is worthy of specific rank.


It appears to be confined to New England, New South Wales, and the extension of that elevated tableland into Southern Queensland.

For a number of localities, with notes, see this work Part XXI, p. 10. The following are additions (New South Wales):—

Belltrees, near Scone (L. A. Macqueen).

“Peppermint,” coarse fibrous bark. Uralla (Dr. J. B. Cleland). Armidale, not rare, especially on Uralla-road (J.H.M.).

Bark rough, fibrous to scaly, with clean tips of branches. Trees varying in size. Very common all over the district, more especially on the flats at the foot of the Peak, Chandler's Peak, near Guyra (J. L. Boorman).

Bald Knob, 16 miles on the Glen Innes-Grafton road. (H. T. Paton.)

“Tree of 20–30 feet, fairly common. Much branched and pendulous in habit, the bark fibrous and somewhat flaky, branches of a dirty white to reddish. Usually on flats, with moisture and good soil. Timber comparatively useless; used for firing when dry, but it rarely grows of sufficient size to be milled.” Wallangarra (J. L. Boorman).

  ― 243 ―


1. With E. cinerea F.v.M.

But E. nova-anglica has—

  • (a) Flowers in more than threes;
  • (b) Mature leaves always lanceolate, i.e., it never flowers in the broad-leaved stage;
  • (c) The peduncles are usually not in pairs in the axils as in the normal form (and in var. multiflora).

E. cinerea has a reddish timber, of very little value, and a reddish fibrous, friable bark, whilst E. nova-anglica has a paler-coloured timber and a more flaky bark.

The seedlings of the two species are much alike.

  ― 244 ―

The Growing Tree.

A.—Rate of Growth.

Following are some references to the scanty Australian literature on the subject:—

“Age of Australian (Tasmanian) Trees.” J. E. Tenison-Woods, in Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., xii, 21 (1878).

“Rate of Growth of Trees” (“The Eucalypts of Gippsland”), Howitt, in Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., ii, 111 (1890).

“Notes on the Rate of Growth of some Australian Trees.” H. C. Russell, in Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., xxv, 168 (1891). The observations were taken at Lake George, and at the Sydney Observatory.

“Rate of Growth of Native and Other Trees.” In the Presidential Address of Henry Deane, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xx, 633–636 (1895), will be found some valuable information on the subject.

See also a paper, “Rate of growth of Indigenous Forest-trees,” compiled by me from the reports of Foresters, in the Agric. Gaz. N.S.W., August, 1893, which contains much useful information, some of which I have abstracted below.

Bull., No. 8, Department of Forestry, New South Wales (April, 1914), is a leaflet entitled “Rate of Growth of Indigenous Commercial Trees,” but they are taken in groups, “Coastal Hardwoods” and “Inland Hardwoods,” and the species are referred to only by vernaculars.

Reference may also be made to the article in my “Forest Flora of New South Wales,” Part 68, which gives some data in regard to the growth of various species in non-Australian countries.

In giving numbers of years of growth of a tree, much depends on the dates in order that we may ascertain the meteorological conditions. As a rule authors omit the dates, and hence we are dealing with indefinite growing entities, which we cannot check. For example, the rate of growth of a tree between the years 1890 and 1900 may be very different to the growth between the years 1895 and 1905, or 1900 and 1910.

With reference to the following brief papers of Rev. J. E. Tenison-Woods and Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Howitt, admirable observers, which tend to show that large trees have probably not the great ages attributed to them by bush people and others, it is interesting to note that expert foresters have, during the last few years, in Europe and elsewhere, thrown doubt on the ages of many trees deemed by tradition, more or less authentic, to be “historic.” It has been pointed out in some cases that trees in a forest die from natural causes or accident, and are succeeded by seedlings of their

  ― 245 ―
own kind which absorb the traditions of a line of ancestors, perhaps remote. We are familiar with statements as to the tree of Robin Hood, and other persons more or less mythical, and even historic; as to “the oldest tree in the world” (attributed to a certain specimen of Dracaena Draco in Teneriffe), and so on.

“It is a very interesting inquiry to know how old are the stately trees which people these (Southern Tasmania, J.H.M.) forests. Judging from their size, one would be inclined to attribute to them great antiquity. I was very anxious to collect data on the subject; but to nearly all my inquiries I only received mere guesses; from 200 to 300 years was the general reply. I found, however, in Mr. Hill a source of information at once reliable and valuable. Mr. R. Hill is the proprietor of an extensive sawmill at Honeywood, on the Huon; he is also a ship-builder and hop-grower. It is from him that I have derived the most of the statistical information in the paper, and the facts which did not come under my personal observation; and I take this opportunity of thanking him for his readiness in affording every aid to inquiry, and express the hope that the colony may long profit by his intelligence, industry and enterprise. Mr. Hill assured me that some of the Gum trees, and perhaps all of them, shed their bark twice in the year. The Stringybark (E. obliqua) is one of the most striking instances of this. He further informed me that, hearing a lecture from Mr. Bicheno on the growth of trees, and the statement that a ring of wood was added to the diameter each year of growth, he was induced to test the truth of this. There was a Blue Gum (E. globulus, J.H.M.) in his garden in Hobart Town, the age of which he was sure of, as his brother had planted it eighteen years previously. He felled it and counted the rings, and found them to be thirty-six in number, or two for every year. From this, and from the shedding of the bark as described, and a long series of observations, he concludes that the sap rises twice in the year. He has for many years watched the growth of the trees, and he believes that for the first twenty years the average growth is about 1 inch in diameter for each year. Out of thousands of trees felled, or cut in his mill, he has not found one over 75 years old, and a very large proportion of the serviceable timber is composed of trees about 50 years of age. Quite recently he has had a very interesting opportunity of verifying these observations. At Ladies' Bay (between Port Esperance and Southport), a paddock on the farm of Mr. D. Rafton was cleared for the purposes of cultivation. It was exactly sixteen years this summer (1877–78) since a crop was taken off it, and was quite overgrown with saplings, which were all cut down. Mr. Hill, at my request, wrote to Mr. Rafton, requesting him to examine the stumps, and I append his reply:—`Ladies' Bay, 26th April, 1878. According to your request I send you the result of my examination of the stumps of young saplings in the paddock which we are now clearing. Number of rings in the longest saplings, thirty-three; size across the heart-wood where the rings cease, 1 inch. The rings, I observe, are not an equal distance from each other, some of them being three times the size of the others. On making inquiries I find beyond a doubt that it is exactly sixteen years this summer since the last crop was taken off the paddock. Yours truly, D. Rafton.' From these facts I think we may safely adopt Mr. Hill's conclusion that there are two rings of growth for each year, and that the tallest trees of the forest, the giant timber of Tasmania, range from 50 to 75 years old.” (Tenison-Woods, loc. cit.)

Now we come to Howitt, who is speaking of Gippsland:—

The age of the new forest does not, however, depend merely on the general observation that they have sprung up since the settlement of the country in 1840.

I have been enabled to make some direct observations, which show the size of certain trees of known age, and which will serve as comparison for the general growth of the forests.

In 1864 the discovery of auriferous quartz reefs in the Crooked River district, caused a township, which is now called Grant, to be formed on the summit of the mountains, near the source of the Good Luck Creek. In part of the Government reserve, upon which the Warden's quarters and police camp stood, and which was cleared of timber, a few young E. amygdalina (E. radiata is meant, J.H.M.) trees grew, and were permitted to remain. One of these was lately kindly measured for me by Mr. W. H. Morgan, M.M.B., who found it to be 56 feet high and 10 feet in girth three feet above the ground. This tree is an example of very many others of the same species now growing on the surrounding ranges. At Omeo, in the Government reserve, a number of young E. viminalis are now 60 feet high, which in 1863 were only small saplings under 5 feet in height. On the road from Sale to Port Albert, which was formed somewhere about

  ― 246 ―
1858–59, there are numerous places where E. viminalis and E. Muelleriana and other species are now growing upon the ditches formed at the sides of the road. Those, for instance, at Lillies Leaf are on the average about 30 feet high.

These instances show how the occupation of Gippsland by the white man has absolutely caused an increased growth of the Eucalyptus forests in places. I venture, indeed, to say with a feeling of certainty produced by long observation, that, taking Gippsland as a whole, from the Great Dividing Range to the sea, and from the boundary of Westernport to that of New South Wales, that, in spite of the clearings which have been made by selectors and others, and in spite of the destruction of Eucalypts by other means (to which I am about to refer), the forests are now more widely extended and more dense than they were when Angus M'Millan first descended from the Omeo plateau into the low country.” (Howitt, loc. cit.)

Following are some notes on the rate of growth of individual species of trees, arranged in alphabetical order. The notes are so few that the new Forest Controllers of the various States have practically to begin records for themselves. All these are New South Wales records, unless otherwise indicated:—

E. cladocalyx F.v.M.—A tree at Balwyn, near Melbourne, in eleven years and two months attained a height of 53 feet, with a circumference at ground of 43½ inches, at 6 feet, 41 inches. F. Chapman, A.L.S., in Vict. Nat., 7th November, 1918, p. 106.

E. diversicolor F.v.M.—A.B., of Torbay Junction, writes the following concerning rate of growth of trees in Western Australia, in the Western Mail of 26th September, 1913:—

Re age of Karri trees, I note your remark that to find the age of Karri trees you count the number of rings from the centre to the bark. This method is not correct for the majority of native trees of Australia. Many years ago in Gippsland a deal of discussion took place on this subject. The theory that is held by botanists was believed until it was proved by actual fact to be incorrect. I have seen myself White Gum saplings grown in five years—from where a sawmill was in actual work—cut down, and the rings counted from twelve to sixteen in each sapling. (These observations confirm those of Tenison-Woods, already cited. J.H.M.). These saplings grew up in the trolly track the benchmen were walking in five years before, and were from 4 to 8 inches each in diameter. Numerous others found similar cases. Mr. Chris. Mudd, F.L.S., a botanist, visited Gippsland district some little time after. On the fallacy being pointed out to him, he then expressed the opinion that the rings indicated growths, and not years. It is evident this is so, and also that different species of trees have a different number of growths in the year, some only one and some as many as three. The climate also, in the botanists opinion, made the difference. That Karri trees in this district make more than one ring in a year—while they are saplings at least—I am certain, having tested it. The exact number they do make would, however, take a bit of careful investigation, which could perhaps be best found out by some older settler who knew of a tree planted, say thirty or forty years ago.

E. globulus Labill.—

Two trees were planted at the same time on the south side of the Observatory Reserve, in trenched and manured ground. The larger of these trees, that at the south-west corner of the ground, measures 3 ft. 10 in. round 3 feet above the ground. The other one near the cottage measures 3 ft. 5½ in.; they were small pot plants when put in and would now be 16 years old. They do not seem to be growing vigorously, perhaps this is not to be wondered at as the roots cannot penetrate the solid sandstone which is close to the surface where they grow.

The tree in Observatory Park is now 16 years old and is 3 ft. 10 in. round, 3 feet above the ground, or 6½ inches less than the tree at Lake George, which is a year younger. The trees on Mount Victoria measured about 63 inches round after fifty years' growth, and the measures on the Lake George tree (believed to be E. viminalis) seem to justify us in assuming that it enlarged uniformly year after year. Therefore, at fifteen years, the Observatory Park Sydney) tree measured 43 inches. (Russell, loc. cit.)

  ― 247 ―

E. maculata Hook.—Trees with height 60 feet, diameter 24 inches, acquired this in twenty years, and others with height 40 feet acquired a diameter of 10 inches in ten years. They grow on the south coast of New South Wales (Forester J. S. Allan). A spotted Gum in the Shoalhaven district, New South Wales, in an old saw-pit not used for seventeen years, was then 2 feet in diameter by 25 feet to first limb, and 45 feet high; good soil, side of hill. (Forester G. R. Brown).

In Annual Report of the Forestry Commission (up to 30th June, 1919), p. 27, is a note on experiments in coppicing E. maculata and E. pilularis for about two and a half years near Wyong, New South Wales.

E. paniculata Sm.—A tree aged 10 years acquired a height of 40 feet, diameter 10 inches. South Coast (Forester J. S. Allan).

E. pilularis Sm.—A self-sown seedling was measured at Gosford in 1889, on the land which was cleared for a nursery site. In eighteen months it had attained a height of 25 feet, and a circumference of 18 inches. (John McCoig.) In ten years, on the South Coast, a tree acquired a height of 40 feet, diameter 10 inches (Forester J. S. Allan). At Cogo, Wilson's River, in the old vineyard (twenty-five years neglected), are now growing Blackbutts, average 18 inches in diameter, 25 feet to first branch, and 50 feet high. (Forester G. R. Brown, 1895.) A Blackbutt sapling seventeen years ago 12 inches in diameter and 30 feet high, is now (1895) 2 feet 9 inches in diameter, and 40 feet to first limb, 70 feet high. (Forester G. R. Brown, Port Macquarie.)

In January, 1885, I measured certain Blackbutt saplings in the parish of Clybucca, county of Dudley. These saplings were then about 5 years old, and taped about 12 inches girth by a height of 10 feet from the measurements then taken. I find that the same saplings now (1895) average 36 inches girth and a height of 40 feet. (Forester McDonald, Kempsey.)

In Annual Report, Forestry Commission (up to 30th June, 1919), p. 27, is a note on the regrowth in three years of two species (E. propinqua and E. saligna), on land burnt over in the Wyong district, New South Wales.

E. radiata Sieb. (under E. amygdalina Labill). See Mueller's “Eucalyptographia.”

E. rostrata Schlecht.—

In suitable localities I estimate that the Murray River Red Gum attains a height of about 50 to 60 feet in ten years, after which it does not grow so rapidly. It will attain a diameter of about 12 inches in twelve years, then I estimate it increases at the rate of about ¾ inch in a year until it gets to about 24 to 26 inches in diameter. (Inspecting Forester Manton, 1895.)

E. saligna Sm.—

About nine years ago land was cleared at Hogan's Brush, near Gosford. After the clearing, a Blue Gum came up and was suffered to remain. Now it is 50 feet in height, and circumference of 3 feet 6 inches at 4 feet from ground. Measured October, 1895. (Forester John Martin.)

A Blue Gum five years ago was 3 inches in diameter and 15 feet high. It is now (1895) 12 inches in diameter by 15 feet to first limb, and 35 feet high; red second-class soil, in the open. (Forester G. R. Brown, Port Macquarie.)

  ― 248 ―

E. viminalis Labill.—

The young tree that I selected in January, 1885, was one of a cluster of four, close to the jetty (Lake George) on which the lake gauge is placed, and it was found to measure 23 inches round, 3 feet from the ground; it was measured again on the 10th November, 1891, and found to be at 3 feet from the ground 52¼ inches round, almost exactly 17 inches in diameter, that is, an increase from 7 to 17 inches in diameter in six years and eight months, a rate of increase which, if maintained for five years more, would make it a large tree upwards of 2 feet in diameter and only 20 years old.

As to the age of the tree measured at Lake George, it was growing about 4½ or 5 feet within the high-water mark of the great flood of 1874, within which all the trees were killed, the residents when appealed to, said the four trees could not be more than seven or eight years old, which agrees with probabilities as to their age, for they would not spring up until a year or two after the water retired, and it did not leave the spot they grew on until 1875, ten years before I was there. Taking then eight years as their probable age in February, 1885, they would now be almost 15 years old, and the tree measured is now 4 feet 4¼ inches round, 3 feet above the ground. Therefore at fifteen years the Lake George tree measured 52¼ inches. The probable age at this measure was fourteen years eight and a half months; if allowance for three and a half months is made to bring the age up to fifteen full years, it would measure 53¾ inches round; on 22nd November, 1892, girth 54¼ inches; 1st January, 1894, girth 60¼ inches; January, 1895, girth 63¼ inches. (Russell, loc. cit.)

Following is a report on some Victorian viminalis trees:—

Seed sown January, 1912; seedling planted out August, 1912. In December, 1916, this became 25 feet high, and 9 inches in diameter. First sign of flower-buds November, 1915. Flowers annually in November; shed its bark for first time in December, 1916. In full bloom 25th January, 1917. (P. R. H. St. John, in Vict. Nat., February, 1917, p. 155.)

B.—Natural Afforestation.

Following is a valuable contribution to the question of the influence of settlement on Eucalyptus Forests, by the late Dr. A. W. Howitt:—

The influence of settlement upon the Eucalyptus forests has not been confined to the settlements upon lands devoted now to agriculture or pasturage, or by the earlier occupation by a mining population. It dates from the very day when the first hardy pioneers drove their flocks and herds down the mountains from New South Wales into the rich pastures of Gippsland.

Before this time the graminivorous marsupials had been so few in comparative number that they could not materially affect the annual crop of grass which covered the country, and which was more or less burnt off by the aborigines, either accidentally or intentionally, when travelling, or for the purpose of hunting game.

Annual Bush Fires.—These annual bush fires tended to keep the forests open, and to prevent the open country from being overgrown, for they not only consumed much of the standing or fallen timber, but in a great measure destroyed the seedlings which had sprung up since former conflagrations. The influence of these bush fires acted, however, in another direction, namely, as a check upon insect life, destroying, among others, those insects which prey upon the Eucalypts.

Granted these premises, it is easy to conclude that any cause which would lessen the force of the annual bush fires would very materially alter the balance of nature, and thus produce new and unexpected results.

The increasing number of sheep and cattle in Gippsland, and the extended settlement of the district, lessened the annual crop of grass, and it was to the interest of the settlers to lessen and keep within bounds bush fires which might otherwise be very destructive to their improvements.

  ― 249 ―

The results were twofold. Young seedlings had now a chance of life, and a severe check was removed from insect pests. The consequence of these and other co-operating causes may be traced throughout the district, and a few instances will illustrate my meaning.

The valley of the Snowy River, when the early settlers came down from the Maneroo (Monaro) to occupy it, as, for instance, from Willis downwards to Mountain Creek, was very open and free from forests. At Turnback and the Black Mountain, the mountains on the western side of the river were, in many parts clothed with grass, and with but a few large scattered trees of E. hemiphloia.

Forests increased.—The immediate valley was a series of grassy alluvial flats, through which the river meandered. After some years of occupation, whole tracts of country became covered with forests of young saplings of E. hemiphloia, pauciflora (coriacea), viminalis, amygdalina (radiata), and stellulata, and at the present time these have so much increased, and grown so much, that it is difficult to ride over parts which one can see by the few scattered old giants were at one time open grassy country.

Within the last twenty-five years many parts of the Tambo Valley, from Ensay up to Tongio, have likewise become overgrown by a young forest, principally of E. hemiphloia and macrorrhyncha, which extend up the mountains on either side of the valley. This dates especially from the time when the country was fenced into large sheep paddocks, when it became very important that bush fires should be prevented as a source of danger to the fences, and even when fire occurred the shortness of the pasturage checked the spread.

Similar observations may be made in the Omeo district, namely, that young forests of various kinds of Eucalypts are growing where a quarter of a century ago the hills were open and park-like. In the mountains, from Mount Wellington to Castle Hill, in which the sources of the Avon River take rise, the increase of the Eucalyptus forests has been very marked. Since the settlement of the country, ranges, which were then only covered by an open forest, are now grown up with saplings of E. obliqua, E. Sieberiana and others, as well as dense growths of Acacia discolor, A. verniciflua, and other arborescent shrubs. These mountains were, as a whole, according to accounts given me by surviving aborigines, much more open than they are now.

In the upper valley of the Moroka River, which takes its rise at Mount Wellington, I have noticed that the forests are encroaching very greatly upon such open plains as occur in the valley. I observed one range, upon which stood scattered gigantic trees of E. Sieberiana, now all dead, while a forest of young trees of the same species, all of the same approximate age, which may probably be twelve years, growing so densely that it would not be easy to force a passage through on horseback. Again, at the Caledonia River, as at the Moroka, the ranges are in many parts quite overgrown with forests not more than twenty years old. The valleys of the Wellington and Macalister Rivers also afford most instructive examples of the manner in which the Eucalyptus forests have increased in the mountains of Gippsland since the country was settled. The forest in these valleys, below 2,000 feet above sea level, is principally composed of Eucalyptus polyanthemos, E. macrorrhyncha, with occasional examples of E. melliodora and E. Stuartiana; while E. viminalis occupies the river banks and moist flats. I noticed here that E. melliodora and E. macrorrhyncha formed dense forests of young trees, apparently not more than 25 years old. In some places, moreover, one could see that the original forest had been composed, on the lower undulating hills and higher flats, of a few very large E. melliodora, with scattered trees of E. polyanthemos and E. macrorrhyncha. At the present time the two latter have taken possession, almost to the exclusion of E. melliodora. In other places E. polyanthemos or E. macrorrhyncha predominate; but, on the whole, I think the latter will ultimately triumph over its rivals, unless the hand of man again intervenes.

Such observations may also be made in Western and Southern Gippsland, but, of course, with reference to different species of Eucalypts.

In the great forest of South Gippsland many places can be seen where there are substantially only two existing generations of trees; one of a few very large old trees, the others of very numerous trees which are probably not older than thirty to forty years, and in most cases certainly not half that period. The older trees of this second growth do not, I suspect, date further back than the memorable “Black Thursday” (6th February, 1851.—J.H.M.), when tremendous fires raged over this tract of country. It may also be inferred, from the constant discoveries, during the process of clearing, of blackfellows' stone tomahawks, that much of this country now covered by a dense scrub of gum saplings, Pomaderris apetala Aster argyrophylla, and other arborescent shrubs, was at that time mainly an open forest.

  ― 250 ―

I might go on giving many more instances of this growth of the Eucalyptus forests within the last quarter of a century, but those I have given will serve to show how widespread this re-foresting of the country has been since the time when the white man appeared in Gippsland, and dispossessed the aboriginal occupiers, or to whom we owe more than is generally surmised for having unintentionally prepared it, by their annual burnings, for our occupation. (A. H. Howitt in Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., ii, 109, 1890.)

The following is based on what I wrote in the Agric. Gazette, N.S.W., vol. vi, 593 (1895), and also issue for April, 1905:—

The Spontaneous Growth of Trees.—Natural regeneration or re-afforestation is proceeding often without our knowledge, and even in spite of ourselves—quietly, surely.

I was informed here (Failford) and also on the A. A. Company's Estate (Gloucester) that formerly the hills were often destitute of timber where now there is dense forest. The reason of this change is attributed to the over-stocking of the country, the stock eating down the grass so that bush fires (which formerly consumed the seedlings of forest trees) are now less frequent, and devastate smaller areas than they used to do. … Mr. Forester Rudder expresses the opinion that cattle directly aid the propagation of trees by trampling the seeds into the ground.

In Australia and Tasmania the following experience is not uncommon. When sheep are folded the manure becomes quite thick. In a few years, if the sheep be removed, Eucalypts come up freely. This occurs in places in which they were not previously found. It seems to me that this points to the sheep licking up the seed with their feed and redepositing it in manure. Vigorous growth would take place in fertilised soil. Perhaps this matter of natural afforestation (not re-afforestation, as it takes place in areas not previously known to carry trees) may be entirely explained by herbivora grazing in forest land and depositing their dung on non-forest land. The obvious reason why this afforestation does not take place more abundantly, is because sheep and cattle readily eat down young seedlings, which must therefore be protected accidentally or otherwise in order that they may reach maturity.

See also the extract from Dr. Howitt's paper just quoted.

This natural spread of forests should be comfort to those who are apt only to consider the destructive action of the timber-getter, and to lose sight of the compensating influences that are at work.

The springing up of young forest growths where there was formerly forest is, of course, common enough. We do not know how long many seeds will remain dormant in or on the ground after the old growth has been removed. It is not an uncommon thing to see a straight avenue of trees not artificially planted. One fine avenue known to me is along the line of an old chock and log fence, and consists of She-Oaks (Casuarina)note. Oak saplings were used as top-rails for this fence, the seed from the saplings germinated, and the young growth was protected from stock by the fence. The seedlings grew into fine trees, and finally the old fence was removed, leaving only the line of trees which followed the direction of the fence. I have seen a similar occurrence with the Grey Box (Eucalyptus hemiphloia) in the Bringelly, N.S.W., district.

C.—Increment Curves.

There would appear to have only been published, as regards botanically identified trees, data concerning very few species.

Determination of Increment by Stem Analysis.—The scientific forester requires more than the empirical data of rate of growth to which I have already referred. He requires a proper record of growth or increment ascertained by scientific methods.

  ― 251 ―
The Forestry Commission of New South Wales has issued, August, 1918 (the researches were made in 1916), Bulletin No. 13, under the above title, compiled from data supplied by W. A. W. de Beuzeville, Forest Assessor, of which a brief abstract is sufficient for the present purpose.

The determination of the rate of growth of trees and forests is of fundamental importance to the forester, because, without accurate knowledge of this subject, he is unable to fix the annual yield of the forest at that quantity which will ensure that the forest be not over-cut and the forest capital exhausted. The large number of forests throughout the State, which have been operated upon to such an extent that supplies of milling timber are now no longer available, is sufficient evidence of the disastrous result of over-cutting, and the necessity of ascertaining rates of growth and regulating the annual cut accordingly.

Rate of growth may be ascertained either by systematic measurement of standing trees in all stages of growth over a considerable number of years, or by making what is known as stem analyses of felled trees. Stem analysis can be applied only to those species the timber of which shows well-defined annual rings of growth, and for this reason, unfortunately, is inapplicable to the great majority of Australian species. Where possible, however, the method should be used, as it enables the forester to obtain valuable data upon which to regulate cutting operations while waiting for the more accurate information secured from the direct measurement of growing trees.

It should be remembered, however, that the rates of growth ascertained by stem analysis of trees in virgin forests do not necessarily represent the rates which will be obtained in the future under careful forest management. The forest trees from which the selection must be made have attained to maturity only after a long struggle against the competition of their rivals, and without the aid of the forester, who by well-regulated thinnings, can do much to accelerate the rate of growth. Consequently the figures obtained from stem analysis should be regarded rather as the safe minimum to be expected in the future.

For the purpose of obtaining authentic information relative to the growth of species of Eucalyptus on the southern tableland, Mr. Forest Assessor W. A. W. de Beuzeville made stem analysis of the Buddong Mountain Ash (E. gigantea Hook).

The figures and conclusions arrived at for the Mountain Ash are given in full in the Bulletin, as it is reported to be the fastest growing species in New South Wales.

The specimen selected for investigation was a typical forest tree, well grown and carrying a heavy crown occupying little more than half the total height of the tree. It was felled at ground level, and the main stem marked off into nine pieces, each of which was cut through the centre. The concentric rings on each section were counted, and the diameters measured, the information being then tabulated, and the calculations made on the assumption that the concentric rings were annual.note (The method followed is that described in Chapter VI of vol. iii of Schlich's “Manual of Forestry,” to which readers are referred.)

Details of the Analysis.

Section 1 taken at the foot of the tree showed 97 rings. 
Section 2 taken 5 feet above ground level showed 97 rings. 
Section 3 taken 15 feet above ground level showed 95 rings. 
Section 4 taken 25 feet above ground level showed 93 rings. 
Section 5 taken 35 feet above ground level showed 91 rings. 
Section 6 taken 45 feet above ground level showed 88 rings. 
Section 7 taken 55 feet above ground level showed 85 rings. 
Section 8 taken 65 feet above ground level showed 79 rings. 
Section 9 taken 105 feet above ground level showed 53 rings. 
Top, 35 feet long; total height, 140 feet; age, 97 years. 

  ― 252 ―

Thus, at 35 feet from the ground there were only 91 annual rings as against 97 at the base. This means that the part of the tree above 35 feet had been in existence only ninety-one years, so that it took 97–91 = 6 years, for the tree to reach a height of 35 feet. Thus the following table is prepared.—

Height of section in feet.  Number of rings.  Number of years taken to reach height of section. 
97  … 
97  … 
15  95 
25  93 
35  91 
45  88 
55  85  12 
65  79  18 
95  53  44 
140  97 

From this table a curve showing height at different ages is plotted (see Fig. 1, not reproduced, J.H.M.). The very rapid height growth in the first twelve years should be noted as it has an important economic bearing on the regeneration of the forests. A species capable of such rapid growth in early youth is not likely to be suppressed by weeds, and consequently expenditure on early cleanings will probably not be necessary. Compare the figures for E. globulus, in Tasmania, quoted at p. 245.

A further abstract of Mr. de Beuzeville's researches is found in “The Australian Forestry Journal,” for January, 1918.

`The forest of E. gigantea at Buddong appears to be of comparatively recent origin, and is rapidly establishing itself in the surrounding forest of Eucalyptus coriacea and E. rubida. A noteworthy feature is that trees evidently well past maturity are sound to the heart and absolutely free from disease.

The specimen selected for analysis was a typical tree of a typical forest of the species. The annual rings were clearly defined through the whole of the cross sections, and varied very little in width. The tree was well grown, with a good crown, and apparently still vigorous.

A remarkable circumstance was the rapid height growth during the early life of the tree, and this is shown in a series of graphs which accompany the treatise, and disclose the following.—

Growth in height.—2½ years, 20 feet; 6 years, 40 feet; 14 years, 60 feet; 20 years, 68 feet; 40 years, 90 feet; 60 years, 110 feet; 80 years, 126 feet; 96 years, 140 feet.

Growth in diameter.—2 years, 1 inch; 6 years, 2½ inches; 14 years, 6 inches; 20 years, 9 inches; 40 years, 18 inches; 60 years, 28 inches; 80 years, 36 years; 96 years, 42 inches.

Volume of wood.—20 years, 20 cubic feet; 40 years, 75 cubic feet; 60 years, 180 cubic feet; 80 years, 300 cubic feet; 96 years, feet 420 cubic feet.

Calculation on the results of an examination of the area of the cross section at various ages shows that the tree reaches absolute maturity about the ninetieth year, when it will yield almost 5,000 superficial feet of timber.

Mr. de Beuzeville states that the bark amounts to 12 per cent. of the volume of the stem, the very low percentage being accounted for by the thin nature of the bark on the upper portion of the trunk. In conclusion, he remarks that his analysis discloses that “the tree does not reach absolute maturity at the early age often attributed to it, but maintains a vigorous growth long after it has reached the dimensions of a millable log. The present minimum felling girth is 7 feet over bark, and is apparently reached in forty to fifty years. The problem is, therefore, whether if will be most advantageous to operate on the species as at present, or whether the cutting age should be deferred until maturity, when greater volume has been attained.”

  ― 253 ―

Then we come to a paper: “Determination of the Increment of Trees by Stem Analysis. No. 1. Eucalyptus viminalis,” by W. A. W. de Beuzeville, Journ. Roy. Soc. N.S.W., liii, 239 (1919). (N.B.—The species is really E. Dalrympleana Maiden, as described by me in “Forest Flora of New South Wales,” Part LXIV, p. 137. It was formerly confused with E. viminalis.)

The calculations show that the tree increases in height rapidly until about thirty years old, averaging 2·8 feet per annum. This rate gradually diminishes, dropping to 1·6 feet mean annual increase when sixty-six years old. The diameter increase, likewise, is greater during youth, but is fairly evenly maintained during the whole period, ranging from ·37 inches to ·3 inches per annum. The mean annual volume increment, which was ·1 cubic feet at ten years, showing a steady improvement, reaching 1·13 cubic feet at sixty-six years of age.

Earlier in point of publication than the preceding papers, we have “Timber Production and Growth Curves in the Mountain Ash (Eucalyptus regnans),” by R. T. Patton, Proc. Roy. Soc. Vict., xxx (N.S.), i (1917).

It is not convenient to reproduce the graphs of the papers of either Mr. Patton or Mr. de Beuzeville. All the papers should be carefully read, and I will content myself with a few extracts of Mr. Patton's paper also.

It has been said that Mountain Ash will mature in forty years, and will give in this time a butt of from 2 feet to 2 feet 6 inches. It has also been claimed for Mountain Ash that it is the fastest-growing tree in the world, and that it will give a cut of 150,000 feet super. per acre. In order to test the truth of these statements a series of measurements was carried out at Powelltown on logs of this timber.

It was found impossible at the time to get any reliable figures as to either its fast growing rate or its quantity of timber per acre. Many factors militated against this. In the first place, all the forest now being cut is over ripe, and consequently many trees are hollow. Again, a very large number of trees have incipient decay in the heart. Other factors also prevented any accurate estimate being formed. However, there was ample material for a study of the annual rings. It was impossible to obtain measurements from all logs coming in, as in quite a percentage there was either a pipe, or decay had proceeded far enough to destroy the boundaries of the first annual rings. Only those logs then were taken in on which the annual rings were clearly defined. The measurements were taken to the eightieth ring, and not continued further owing to the difficulty in many cases of distinguishing the rings. In one case the rings, though narrow, were easily distinguishable to the 125th ring. It was obvious from these later rings that the tree had lacked vigour. This was borne out by a study of the trees in the standing forest. The paucity of foliage on these big trees is very noticeable, as was also the amount of mistletoe. No mistletoe was observed on the saplings, or even on trees half grown. From these observations one was led to conclude that the tree reaches its prime well under a hundred years.

The most remarkable feature is the rapid expansion of the trunk (and hence width of annual ring), during the first ten years of growth. …

The differences between the width of the annual rings as the tree gets older will be less and less. There is a point of interest here, and that is that the enormous decrease in the width of the ring may be due to overcrowding, or putting it in other words, that, as the trees grow older, and so many are striving for the same light and carbon dioxide, the crown is not as large as it would be if the forest were controlled. It was very apparent from a study of the mature trees that width of ring is largely dependent on the distance of the trees apart, for in many logs the original centre is well to one side of the mature log. Some trees have limbs on the congested side only 6 to 8 feet long, while on the free side they are 15 to 20 feet long. The maintenance of a good head is important from a forestral point of view. …

From the study of the annual rings, then, we may conclude at present that the Mountain Ash reaches its maturity between the fortieth and fiftieth years; but we are not entitled to conclude that the tree is then fit for milling. In view of the fact that in the future a large proportion of this timber will probably find its way on to the market in a dressed and seasoned condition, the tree cannot be said to be fit for

  ― 254 ―
milling until the wood is ripe. It may well be, that so long as the tree maintains a good head, the timber is improving in quality, and therefore it may be inadvisable to cut it during this period. There are other factors as well to be considered with regard to the time of harvesting the timber. The upkeep of this forest is small at present, as compared with that of the forests of the old world. Hence interest charges will be much smaller, and we could therefore allow the forest to stand for a much longer period than is the case with old world forests.

See also “On the Growth, Treatment, and Structure of some Common Hardwoods,” by R. T. Patton, Proc. Roy. Soc. Vict., xxi (New ser.), 394 (1919), with one plate and seven text figures.

The author systematises his observations under the following heads:—Height, density of trees per acre, seasoning of timber, structure. He criticises the adoption of the Schlich method of measurement of diameter growth (at all events, as regards Australian conditions) if only because, in our “empirical” or managed forests, it is difficult to select an average tree for research.

The question of the height of E. regnans (Victorian Mountain Ash), the only Eucalypt referred to, is dealt with at p. 255 of the present work. The question of density of trees per acre is only now being undertaken, since we have only quite recently established forestry departments taking cognisance of our Eucalypts on scientific lines.

As regards seasoning of timber, I will give a few references to this, and also to structure of timber, when I deal with those branches of the subject.

Now let us turn to a paper, “Estimation of the Rate of Growth of Trees by Stem Analysis,” by C. E. Lane Poole, “Jarrah,” i, No. 3, p. 14, November, 1918.

The author begins:—

“It is an unfortunate fact that the bulk of Australian eucalypts do not lend themselves to this system of estimation. There are exceptions, of which Mountain Ash (Eucalyptus Delegatensis) of New South Wales is one, but in most cases Eucalypts do not appear to have any distinct period of rest during the year, with the result that there are no well-defined rings. Karri (E. diversicolor) in its very early years (up to about twenty-four), shows annual rings, but after that time it is difficult to distinguish them.”

He then gives an admirable account of the method, choosing the Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata or insignis), a Californian species much cultivated in Australia, for purposes of illustration.

D.—The Largest Australian Trees.

The size of a tree may be measured in vertical height or girth, the two dimensions usually adopted. The fairest method would, of course, be to compute the cubic contents. As regards girth, it is to be regretted that many measurements are not strictly comparable, because of the varying heights above ground at which they have been taken.

It has been known for many years that Australia and Tasmania possess very large trees, attention having been directed earliest to those of Tasmania. It has since been proved, I think, that the largest trees (E. regnans) occur in Gippsland, Victoria,

  ― 255 ―
although those of the Western Australian Karri (E. diversicolor) are very large. Most of the literature has gathered around the Gippsland trees, and will be found quoted below by Mr. Hardy and myself.

A discussion on the height of Gippsland trees (Mr. Howitt's paper, in Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., ii (1890), in which Baron von Mueller and Mr. A. W. Howitt joined, will be found in Journ. Roy. Soc. Vict., iii (new series), 124 (1890). Mr. Howitt had measured a tree of 350 feet, and Mueller stated that trees 400 feet high had existed. The discussion is well worth referring to.

In my “Forest Flora of New South Wales,” Vol. II, pp. 161–165 (1905), I gave such evidence as was available to me in regard to “The giant trees of Australia.” I wrote at p. 163 in the following words:—

Professor Sargent is an eminent authority on the subject of which he treats, and in view of the actual measurements that he presents, viz., 340 feet in height for a Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and a girth round the trunk of 107 feet for its congener, the “Big Tree” (S. Wellingtonia), I am of opinion that, so far as our knowledge goes at present, California is the home both of the tallest and of the broadest trees in the world.

In the Federal Handbook published for the visit of the British Association in 1914, I wrote:—

The official size of the tallest Gippsland tree is given as—height, 326 ft. 1 in.; girth, 25 ft. 7 in., measured 6 feet from the ground; locality, spur of Mount Baw Baw, 91 miles from Melbourne. This is enormous, but different from the alleged heights of from 400 to 525 feet foisted on Mueller, and which will probably not be eradicated from the newspapers for another generation.

As regards the Californian trees brought into comparison … the difference (under 14 feet) against the Gippsland tree is not large, and it would not be surprising if additional investigations should cause this friendly competition between Australia and the United States to end differently.

Presently I will show that New Zealand is in this competition.

“A short account of the big trees of California,” Bull. No. 28, United States Department of Agriculture, Division of Forestry (1900), gives a later account than that of C. S. Sargent.

In the “summary of facts” it is stated that “the dimensions of the Big Tree are unequalled.” A number of dimensions of trees, living and dead, are quoted, but comparatively few with full particulars. Thus the height is given of many, the diameter at the ground of some, and at 6 feet above the ground of others. Many particulars are given in regard to them in the Bulletin, which is not easy of brief abstraction.

For particulars as to tall trees of Brazil, see Bates' “Naturalist on the Amazons” (Murray's Pop. Ed., 1910, pp. 29, 30).

In a paper “On the Ascent of Water in Trees” (Phil. Trans. B., Vol. 199, 1905) Professor A. J. Ewart (of the University of Melbourne), has some remarks in regard to the reputed heights of the Gippsland trees, after referring to certain reputed measurements which have been repeated over again by authors copying one another, as “greatly exaggerated” and “considerably exaggerated,” he concludes, “The tallest Australian tree, therefore, hitherto accurately measured, barely exceeds 300 feet, and it is possible that some of the records from other countries, notably America, may suffer a similar diminution when accurately tested.”

  ― 256 ―

Mr. R. T. Patton (Proc. Roy. Soc. Vict., xxxi, 396, 1919) has some notes on the height of E. regnans. He gives 326 feet as the “greatest height recorded,” and the two highest measurements as made by himself as 249 and 261 feet.

In Trans. N.Z. Inst., xlvi, p. 9 (published 1914), is a paper by T. F. Cheeseman on. “The Age and Growth of the Kauri (Agathis australis),” in which he refers to the sizes of other large trees. He says: “Seeing that the age and size of large forest trees have been regularly overestimated in other countries, it could hardly be expected that New Zealand would escape similar exaggeration.” He has just been quoting Professor A. J. Ewart's cautious remarks on Gippsland trees at some length.

Incidentally, it may be mentioned that in the American “Journal of Forestry,” xvii, 890 (November, 1919), there is a note on Kauris and Californian Big Trees as follows:—

The New Zealand Department of Lands has published a small book by D. E. Hutchins on the `Waipoua Kauri Forest,” in which occurs the statement.—“There were two gigantic Kauri in the Tutamoe State Forest, each having a diameter of 22 feet, and the best one having a clean bole of 100 feet. This was estimated to contain 295,788 board feet, which is twice the size of the largest California big tree, one of the Calaveras Grove, containing 141,000 board feet.”

The commentator says:—“It is strange that at the present day the claims of California for large sized trees should be contested by New Zealand. The following data show that even though New Zealand has some immense trees, as those just described appear to be, still they cannot equal the giant Sequoias, of which we are justly proud.

“A Sequoia tree cut in 1854, called `The Mother of the Forest,' had a diameter of 30 feet and a height of 321 feet, and contained 537,000 board feet, which is twice that given for these famous Kauri trees of New Zealand. In addition, this tree was 137 feet to the first limb. Another tree, called `The Father of the Forest,' measured a number of years ago 36 feet in diameter, 400 feet in height, and 200 feet to the first limb.” (These seem round numbers. J.H.M.)

Mr. D. E. Hutchins, “A Discussion of Australian Forestry,” pp. 315–17 (1916), says:—

I am sure that every patriotic Australian will agree that an attempt should be made by the Forest Departments in Victoria and Western Australia to find out the actually biggest trees, measure them, and place them under special protection.

I quite agree with this, and he is unconsciously repeating a very old suggestion of mine, but Mr. Hutchins says: “(Mr. Maiden) perhaps goes to the other extreme, and throws doubt on quite good evidence.” If my readers will take the trouble to turn to what I have said, and also to what Mr. Hutchins has said, they can judge for themselves. If I have tried to avoid anything, it is to be “extreme,” and my article was an honest attempt to weigh the evidence on scientific (i.e., truthful) lines. The genial forester, when he has opportunity to consult the literature of the subject, will see that I am by no means the severest critic of reputed measurements of big Australian and American trees. [I wrote the above some years ago, before our friend had received the well-deserved honour of Knighthood, to be followed, alas too soon, by his death in January, 1920.]

  ― 257 ―

The most recent writer on the subject is A. D. Hardy, of the State Forest Department of Victoria (“The Tall Trees of Australia,” Vict. Nat., xxxv, 46, July, 1918), an authority whose researches in regard to Australian forestry matters are always valuable, and, therefore, one reads what he has to say with interest in regard to a subject which has already been surrounded by much romance. This romance, emanating from Australia itself, has found its way into scientific publications in Europe and America.

The paper contains some most useful information in regard to the giant trees of America, and, indeed, of other countries, but what is of special interest to me at the present time is the information he has brought together, additional to that already compiled by myself. At p. 50 Mr. Hardy quotes three measurements which exceed those enumerated in the Victorian atlas of giant trees. The following is the “best measurement by a legally qualified measurer.” Mr. G. Cornthwaite measured a tree in 1880, 2 miles from Thorpdale, Gippsland. “I cannot find the old notes taken at the time, but I am quite sure as to the measurement of the length.” He gives the height at 375 feet, allowing for the stump. “At about 12 feet from the ground (it) was about 6 feet in diameter.”

Although these figures are to some extent based on memory, if they satisfy Mr. Hardy they go a long way towards satisfying me.

Mr. Hardy quotes some American Sequoias, larger than the Redwood (S. sempervirens) measured by Professor C. S. Sargent, at 340 feet. Doubtless after the war (written in 1918, J.H.M.) the Americans will examine their records of measurements and state whether they can beat our record of 375 feet or not.

As regards bulk, Mr. Hardy quotes the tree pictured as “King Edward VII” by Mr. Hugh Mackay, Conservator of Forests of Victoria, in the handbook of that State prepared for the British Association meeting of 1914. It had a girth of 80 feet, measured at about 10 feet from the ground.

I have often pointed out (e.g., Presidential Address, Royal Society of N.S.W., 1897), that it is desirable that we should have measurements by surveyors or other competent observers of the heights and girths of definite Eucalyptus trees, and the ascertainment of such data should be the business of the forestry staffs of all the States. We ought to know the sizes of our primeval vegetation, even if these biggest trees, when removed by fire or other catastrophe, may never be succeeded by others which can be permitted to attain equal magnitude.

Instead of going further into details in regard to the sizes of the largest trees, it may be convenient to consult the following list of species, arranged in alphabetical order, in which the sizes are dealt with. Thus the following may be referred to in their proper places in the present work, and in my “Forest Flora of New South Wales”:—

Eucalyptus Andrewsi Maiden, E. botryoides Sm. (H. Hopkins records E. botryoides in the rich alluvial flats of the Snowy River, stately trees of 150 feet or more in height, and boles of 6 or 7 feet in diameter, and 50 or 60 feet to the first limb), E. Dalrympleana

  ― 258 ―
Maiden, E. Deanei Maiden (Mr. A. Murphy informs me that there are plenty of trees in the Ourimbah district, near Gosford, 10 to 12 feet in diameter), E. Dunnii Maiden (see note below), E. diversicolor F.v.M. (see this work, Part XX, p. 298), E. gigantea Hook. f. (see note below), E. Jacksoni Maiden, E. goniocalyx F.v.M., E. maculata Hook., E. microcorys F.v.M., E. nitens Maiden, E. pilularis Sm. (see this work, Part L, p. 30), E. regnans F.v.M., E. viminalis Labill.

Under E. viminalis, Mueller (“Eucalyptographia”) quotes a Victorian tree up to 320 feet, with a diameter of 17 feet.

Baker and Smith (“Research on the Eucalypts,” p. 137) say this tree is “probably the largest of New South Wales Eucalypts.” “This is perhaps the most widely-distributed species of the genus in these States, as well as probably the tallest, as trees measuring over 300 feet high frequently occur.” (p. 138.)

In view of the fact that E. Dalrympleana has been “carved out” of E. viminalis, and of further investigations in regard to our White Gums, it is desirable that E. viminalis and its allies should be remeasured. E. viminalis, sensu strictu, is, however, undoubtedly a big tree.

E. Dunnii.—

“I measured one standing tree of the above, which gave a girth of 24 feet 4 inches, with a length of at least 30 feet; this works out 13,322½ feet—superficial. The tree in question is fairly round and straight, and apparently sound. A few days later, “To-day I measured another tree. It was felled for sawmill purposes. It was perfectly sound, straight and round. This tree was cut into four logs 11 feet in length (each log), the butt log measured 13 feet in circumference and contained 4,500 super. feet. Royalty at 6d. (£1 2s. 6d.).” (William Dunn, Forest Guard, Acacia Creek, Macpherson Range, near Queensland border, September, 1905.)

E. gigantea.—I submit an interesting note based on observations made in Tasmania in the thirties, and which I submitted to Mr. Rodway, the Government Botanist of that State, who reports: “In the Richmond district there is much E. obliqua and E. gigantea. I have never seen the former of such gigantic proportions as cited, wherefore think reference was to latter. At the time this article was written, all the forms with rough bark were referred to obliqua, and those with smooth to amygdalina.”

Following is the note:—

“Mr. Backhouse and my son, Dr. Joseph Hooker, have made MSS. remarks upon a great number of new species in Van Dieman's Land, and it is there that the trees are seen to attain the most gigantic size. Near Richmond, in Yorkshire, the former gentleman visited a place in the forest remarkable for an assemblage of gigantic “stringybarks,” Eucalyptus obliqua? There, within a space of half a mile, he measured ten different trees from 30 to 55 feet in circumference at four feet from the ground; and some of these fine sound trees were upwards of 200 feet high. One prostrate tree was 35 feet in circumference at the base, 22 feet at 66 feet up, 19 feet at 110 feet up. There were two large branches at 120 feet, and the elevation of the tree, traceable by the branches on the ground, was 213 feet. `We ascended this tree on an inclined plane formed by one of its limbs, and walked four abreast with ease upon its trunk! In its fall it had overturned another 168 feet high, which had brought up with its roots a ball of earth 20 feet across. It was so much imbedded in the earth that I could not get a string round it to measure its girth. On our return I measured two stringybarks, near the houses on the Hampshire Hills, that had been felled for splitting into rails, each 180 feet long. Near to them is a tree that has been felled, which is so large

  ― 259 ―
that it could not be cut into lengths for splitting, and a shed has been erected against it, the tree serving for the back.” Another tree, at Emu Bay, supposed to be 250 feet high, was 55½ feet round at 5 feet from the ground, and nearly 70 feet in circumference at the surface of the ground. “My companions spoke to each other, when at the opposite side of this tree to myself, and their voices sounded so distant that I concluded they had inadvertently left me, to see some other object, and immediately called to them. They in answer, remarked the distant sound of my voice, and enquired if I were behind the tree.” (Bot. Mag., vol. 69, t. 4036, 1843.)

Explanation of Plates (196–199).

Plate 196.

Plate 196: EUCALYPTUS PANICULATA Sm. [See also Plates 57 and 197.] Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. paniculata Sm.

(See also Plate 57, Part XIII.)

  • 1a. Juvenile leaf; 1b, juvenile leaf (slightly more advanced); 1c, twig showing mature leaves and buds; 1d, immature fruits, showing staminal rings; 1e, fruits. Asquith, near Hornsby, between Sydney and the Hawkesbury River (W. F. Blakely).
  • 2a. Buds; 2b, anthers. On the main road, near Gordon Railway Station, North Shore Line, Sydney (W. F. Blakely).
  • 3. Juvenile leaf, not in its earliest stage. Kedron, near Brisbane, Queensland (C. T. White).
  • 4. Mature leaves and fruits. Mount Gravatt, near Brisbane (C. T. White).
  • 5a. Mature leaf; 5b, buds; 5c, fresh anthers. From the same set of specimens, some of the dried anthers precisely match 2b. Waterworks-road, Brisbane (J. L. Boorman).

Plate 197.

Plate 197: EUCALYPTUS PANICULATA Sm. [See also Plates 57 and 196.] (E. Fergusoni R. T. Baker, Fig. 1, E. Nanglei R. T. Baker, Figs. 2 and 3. both drawn from the types.) Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. paniculata Sm.

(See also Plates 57, Part XIII, and 196.)

E. Fergusoni R. T. Baker.

  • 1a. Mature leaf; 1b, mature leaf and immature buds; 1c, fruits, markedly ribbed. Bulladelah, N.S.W. (L. C. Maxwell). The type.

I match E. Fergusoni perfectly with specimens of E. paniculata. My attempts to separate them have been most painstaking.

E. Nanglei R. T. Baker.

  • 2a. Juvenile leaf; 2b, mature leaf and immature buds; 2c, fruits. E. Nanglei has, like E. paniculata, the staminal ring, and in this respect shows some affinity to E. mellidora A. Cunn., E. sideroxylon A. Cunn. Morrissett, N.S.W. (C. F. Laseron). The type.
  • 3a. Mature leaves and buds; 3b, mature leaf, buds and expanding flowers; 3c, anthers, different views. Lindfield and Nowra, a mixed parcel, as received from Mr. Baker. Lindfield is a railway station on the North Shore Line, near Sydney; Nowra is on the Shoalhaven River, about 94 miles south of Sydney. (R. T. Baker and L. G. Irby). Co-types.

I am not able to separate E. Nanglei from E. Fergusoni, nor either of them from E. paniculata.

  ― 260 ―

Plate 198.

Plate 198: EUCALYPTUS DECORTICANS (F.M. Bailey) Maiden (1). E. CULLENI R. H. Cambage (2). Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. decorticans sp. nov.

(Syn. E. siderophloia Benth., forma decorticans F. M. Bailey.)

  • 1a, 1b, 1c, the three youngest leaves I can find. They show that the juvenile leaves are narrow and do not differ in venation from the mature leaves. 1d, mature leaves and buds; 1e, anthers, 1f, fruits (Eidsvold, Queensland (Dr. T. L. Bancroft). The type.

E. Culleni R. H. Cambage.

  • 2a. Juvenile leaves; 2b, buds; 2c, front and back view of anther; 2d, mature leaves and fruits. Alma-den, North Queensland (R. H. Cambage, No. 3905). The type.

Plate 199.

Plate 199: EUCALYPTUS BEYERI R. T. Baker (1,2). [See also Fig. 21, Plate 57.] Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

E. Beyeri R. T. Baker.

(See also figure 21, Plate 57, Part XIII, as E. paniculata.)

  • 1a. Twig with buds; 1b, fruits. St. Mary's (about 30 miles west of Sydney). (R. T. Baker.) The type.
  • 2a. Juvenile leaf; 2b, twig with buds and flowers; 2c, twig with fruits. About 1 mile south-east of Kingswood Station (close to St. Mary's) and ¼ mile from the Great Western road (W. F. Blakely and J. L. Boorman).

Figs. 3 and 4 I at present look upon as intermediate between E. Beyeri and E. paniculata. It will be observed that the leaves are broader and coarser than those of E. Beyeri, but the trees were high, and they appeared to be a second growth, abundant on the branches, and therefore perhaps abnormal. E. Beyeri requires further investigation both as regards its botanical characters and timber.

  • 3a. Mature leaves; 3b, buds and flowers; 3c, staminal ring, which is very deciduous; 3d, anthers. A very large and very old tree in a paddock about ¼ mile north-west of St. Mary's Station (W. F. Blakely and J. L. Boorman.)
  • 4a, 4b, 4c. Leaves of various sizes; 4d, buds. Anthers the same as 3d. On the Richmond road, ¼ mile from St. Mary's Station (W. F. Blakely and J. L. Boorman).